Riemann Hypothesis and The Hypergeometrical Universe

Riemann Hypothesis and The Hypergeometrical Universe

Our love for knowledge and beauty has always driven us to find the most sublime analogies to represent what we are seeing in the Universe. Einstein wanted to read God's Mind. The Hypothetical Higgs Boson has been named by some as the God Particle. I equated the steps of my Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe as being somewhat similar to the Pendulum of Brahma. At each cycle we see ourselves changed by that Universal Operator.

Mathematics is always the Golden Standard of beauty. We always hope to find a nicely fitting mathematical equation to describe the whole Universe. Mathematicians (String Theorists) are especially hopeful..:). Of course, after all, that would be redemption to their endeavor of creating the least physical (most mathematical) theory in history.

Euler's Beta Function relationship to the Strong Force model was immediately recognized as the sign we are on the right track, after all, for a theory to be correct it has to be aesthetically beautiful….:) Form over content…very typical of our Mankind always driven by superficial calculations….:)

It just happens that there isn't any indication that physics doesn't matter, that is, there isn't any indication that at the end of all, we will have everything described by a simple mathematical equations that overrules all physical properties.

For example, there is the wave equation which describes all waves as long as they have a natural velocity or one knows the elasticity of the medium where those waves propagate. This means that even though, the knowledge of an equation which would describe such a general phenomena as waves, the physics is still there in the form of a pesky constant.. J

This does not demerit the scientists who found those beautiful equations, it just serves as a reminder that there might be a limit on what mathematical abstraction can achieve.

It has been said with some understated deepness that the Riemann Hypothesis might be the solution to the Theory of Everything, that is, something, some force, some string might be represented somehow by the zeros of the Zeta function along the critical line. The details are fuzzy since this is just a guess...:)

Scientists look down to Horoscopists all their lives…J It is well know that vague statements can always find resonance within some fraction of the population and thus keep the readers happy and aware of their daily best options…J

One might say that the same happens in Science. There is a difference. Since we are a much more educated bunch than the average person, our guesses are better educated..:) that is, there is something deep in the number theory applied to Primes..:)

Of course, this is just because people doesn't know how to think about numbers and one should expect that if the zeros of an equation are primes, most likely the logic behind the construction of the equation is such that only certain primes will be zeros..:) It is like being surprised that f(x)=(x-1)*(x-2) has zeros equal to 1 and 2.

Number theory is just not developed enough to see the underlying logic behind the Riemann Hypothesis and the Zeta Function (or Eta Function on the Analytic Continuation).

As usual, the statement that the Riemann Hypothesis should be relevant to our understanding of the Universe can be decomposed into the simpler statement that Primes will be relevant..:) I am a simple minded man, so I will cut to the chase and explore this proposition..:)

Nobody bothered to think about Primes because nothing in Physics looks like Primes. If a poor string theorist looks around and think about making Primes to be some property of strings them we might end up with 10^500000000000000 possible Universes with different string theories explaining each one of them..:)

A Standard Model Physicist is not in much better position. Let say that zero are electromagnetic waves, the ONE is…J The next basic particles are electron and Proton … Neutron might be TWO but that does not solve the problem. Electrons and Protons are certainly not equal in the Standard Model and the analogy dies there…:)

Of course, that is not the case in the Hypergeometrical Universe.

ARE CHARGED PARTICLES PRIMES

YES.

In my theory one can easily relate ZERO to the dilaton field and its spatial modulation (electromagnetic waves).

ONE is clearly the Fundamental Dilator which represents all four fundamental particles (Electron, Proton, AntiElectron, AntiProton).

TWO is of course the Neutron

THREE are the Pions

FIVE are the CRAZY DELTAS

SEVEN are the KAONS

ELEVEN are the XIS Star – This Channel decays into a KaonZero and a Pion Minus.

THIRTEEN are the LUCKY OMEGAS

ARE Neutral Majorama PARTICLES 2^N NUMBERS

YES. I am sure the numerologists will have a field day..:)

As in any good Horoscope, there is a caveat. There are exclusions to the Prime Rule. They are associated with another nice mathematical formula, the formula for 2 to the power of another number. (2,4,8,16…)

TWO is the precursor to a Gamma photon from the annihilation of a Positron-Electron pair.

FOUR is the Pion Zero

EIGTH is the KAON ZERO

Later, I will show how the mathematical space topology and mathematical instrumentation needed to solve the Riemann Hypothesis also describes the mass of the Hyperons…:)

A hint. Look at the Fundamental Dilator coherence 'energy' diagram. The degenerated states on the two potential wells lose their degeneration due to the finite velocity of light, which creates a time delay for a spatial rotation within the 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hypersphere.

Think about what does it means to be real…:) and read the Meaning of Material Existence blog I wrote in the past.

ARE THERE Neutral PARTICLES = 2*N NUMBERS

As in any good Horoscope, there is always something for everyone. It just happens that 2N is also a valid mapping for Neutral Particles.

Of course, since they decompose into opposite charged particles, they have to be the SUM OF TWO PRIMES (Goldbach's Conjecture) or 2 Majorama Particles…:)

SIX is the DELTA ZERO
























Now that you know the answer to the question, it should be easier to derive the equation that describes the process...:) I wrote a book called The Flying Orchestra, which represents our journey through the Universe inside the Ligthspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe. Most of us :) are composed of isotopes, which turned out to be quite harmonious dimensional notes. The Hyperons are the basic notes of our Universe, that is, the most unique, cacophonous notes one can create- like Heavy Metal...:)

In comparison, the isotopes are like Mozart Symphonies...NAH....in fact, they are quite boring and more like Kenny G

In the next few blogs, I will address the isotopes, the mass equation (or God Equation if you so prefer :) .

I am awaiting for Steven Chu to say something before I write about how to make a neutral particle accelerator or anything accelerator or dimensional accelerator...:)

Cheers,

MP

Listen Dr Fate's Music...:) I love it...:)

Dr. Fate

I am not someone given to believe in Fate. Unless it is Scientific Fate or the Fate of my scientific theory...

My last Blog explored the need to believe or better the imperative for believing contained in certain widely accepted theories. As you might know, wide acceptance is not an assurance of correctness..:)

By the way, surrounding oneself just with friendly admirers is what academia has been doing and that is what precluded a stronger revaluation of current models and created the censorship conditions that prevail today. One should welcome ideas and their purporters if they pass basic scrutiny. I did that with Dr. Chucanov. If one idea is not good, it shouldn't take a big effort to pinpoint its flaws.

For example: The Standard Model started with some nicely defined Up and Down Quarks... As usual, they asked us to believe. Someday, in some huge accelerator we would meet those little things and be happy that we knew they would come..:) When they did not appear, they asked us to believe that they were glued together...:) Oh, Good Lord....

Peter Higgs demanded us to believe that a Boson would come out of collisions in the heart of another beast (another accelerator - Large Hadron Collider)... It is just the beast that changed, the request is the same ---- Faith ....

No wonder some people see some similarities between Religion and Science. Both can be dogmatic and censor iconoclastic non members of the choir...

Despite of this requirement of Faith, I believe that Fate is a slightly different concept. They sound pretty much the same to me, but in one we have to drop disbelieve, rationality, questioning (Faith) while in the other we only have Rationality, Questioning to hold us up...

My believe in Fate is that there will be a theory in which things will fit so well and make so much sense that Anyone Will Be Able To See That Truth Has Been Spoken.

Of course, that will have to be followed by hardcore experimental proof...:)

A theory is just a guide...... A great theory can be a map...

Currently, I am placing my bets on my theory. I had other "Theories" in the past, but I knew that they were just concoctions in which things pointed, maybe, in the correct direction but they didn't hold water properly..;)

I've never bother people with hare-brain schemes like Peter Higgs or Alan Guth (Higgs Boson and The Inflation Theory), but I decided that The Hypergeometrical Universe deserved a closer look.

There is a path for redemption for Peter Higgs and Alan Guth or any other Big Wig. It is very simple, just take a position in favor of bringing (my theory and others) back into the realm of discussion... Not unlike reopening the Plenarium for debate.

Unsettle Physics!!!

Of course, that would be slightly detrimental to your Superstar status but in History that would make you even Bigger. It takes a real scientist to second guess himself/herself, to revise one's own hypotheses and to appreciate the beauty in someone else's ideas.

Currently, I believe that the Fate of this theory is to have its own life. I am just the messenger.

Some people mentioned that Science requires a highly mathematical framework. I don't believe that to be the case. Any theory is just simple ideas dressed up in algebra. The ideas behind them are always quite simple...an Harmonic Oscillator here, a vibrating string there, mapping mass to a self-energy or not....making infinite equal to zero.... etc...etc...

All the math, the proposed Lagrangians, Green Function Propagators, Feymann Diagrams sums, Dyson Theorem, etc. are simple ideas... Superstrings wrapped around Calabi-Yau manifolds always reminds me Bacon Wrapped Scallops...:)

Those are simple analogies and they taste great...:)

I used Naked Science in my blog because it shows how rich this theory is and how much easier it is to think in terms of physical ideas than to get lost in algebra.

The goal is to See The Florest By The Trees..:)

If you oppose censorship, click the Chicken below and learn all about my plight...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- Read this with the musical background...:) By the way, I identify myself with Dr. Fate...:)

Of course, not being a connosseur of marvel comics, I suspect Dr. Fate is a Force of Good..:)

Sapor Similis Pullus

Comment on the Mercury Perihelion Solution

Comments are always welcome

Comment on the Mercury Perihelion Solution

I found this site using google and i want to thank you for your work. You have done really very good site. Great work, great site! Thank you!

Sorry for offtopic

Comments are always welcome, as well as solid criticism. I tried to tie down the theory the best I could without the benefit of criticism...:)

In the Mercury Perihelion Prequel, I reviewed the why Paul Gerber's work was dismissed. He started with a velocity dependent formula for which he couldn't provide a convincing derivation.

I reproduced his formula when I derived the Gravitation force for a non-rotating Sun..:) In fact, Gerber's formula is a limiting value of my more general formula.

Of course, nobody derives the Gravitational formula from first principles in any theory other than in this one. Remember that this theory is derived to explain motion, interaction, action-at-distance and does it through the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and the Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Shock-Wave Universe Topology. All forces come naturally when I reconnected this theory to our Physics.

The derivation was done in the relaxed Fabric of Space condition, that is, I started the derivation using a flat local Fabric of Space.

I considered interaction between dilators where the probe dilator was moving radially with the expansion of the Universe. This happens when the local fabric of space is totally relaxed and its normal points radially- perpendicularly to our 3D Universe. This means that the force was derived as a partial derivative of the deformation of the local fabric of space from a given initial velocity(zero velocity). This is equivalent in Strict Relativity to consider the relative velocity zero while the bodies interact. Under those conditions, SR is well approximated by Newtonian Dynamics.

To recover the force for any velocity one has to use the Lagrangian Force equivalent, which we used on the Mercury Perihelion Prequel. For the case of Gravitational Lensing, the velocity amplitude (c) doesn't change. The only change is its direction. Under those conditions, the partial derivative was fine.

This is means that Paul Gerber's ansatz equation for a velocity dependent Gravitation was OK. He just did not have a understanding of the WHY...:)

As I mentioned, this theory passed the basic tests a theory has to pass to be discussed (Gravitational Lensing, Mercury's Perihelion, reproduced all the necessary forces and provide an alternative description to the remaining forces strong and electroweak).

There are a few remaining blogs I want to write but have been too busy to do. One of them has to do with our interest in traveling within our galactic neighborhood. This blog will disclose a new propulsion mechanism which is good enough for short travels.

To go further there is a way to create macroscopic Fabric of Space waves which would lead to light speed traveling of massive bodies. I know that this is forbidden by Relativity..:) of course, it is..:) but that is a just an artifact of the Newtonian choice of Force definition.

It is not that massive bodies cannot travel at the speed of light, it is that due to how one chose to interact them makes their interaction ineffectual to accelerate them to the speed of light. I will propose another mechanism to create motion.

I wrote about Newton's, Galileo's blunders...Of course, I've never meant to minimize their contribution... Just a provocative hindsight consideration aimed at creating a debate..:) As I always mention, nothing would be done without the work of our predecessors, luminaries..and no good theory can be built without strong debate and criticism.

Please, always feel free to compliment but also accept your need to criticize it. It is OK...:)

Cheers,

MP

Comment on Dr. Steven Chu's Letter

Comment on Dr.

Steven Chu's Letter

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Letter to Dr. Steven Chu":

You do understand that electrons and protons are completely different things, right? Electrons are fundamental particles, and protons are made of three quarks (two up quarks and one down quark) with gluons keeping the together.

Regardless, have you heard back from Dr. Chu yet?

If not, the point I mentioned above may be the reason, OR you mentioned "revise Science." I'm sure you meant well, but I think it comes across as too bold.

This comment was left by a well-meaning scientist...:)

He was way too kind. If I hadn't paid attention to the fact that seemingly a Proton and an Electron are different entities (different things), I would be arrogant.

That is a basic piece of knowledge mankind accumulated during its journey towards illumination...:)

He mentioned that by stating that my theory was an attempt to revise science, I had come across as too bold.

Hadn't I paid attention to the very relevant detail that an electron is different from a proton in the current understanding, I would be more than bold, I would be really stupid and arrogant.

Despite of the fact that I don't put my picture and name on each and every page of my blog, my name and information can be easily found in the pdfs. I believe that my theory is important, I am not. I am just the carrier. This means that everything I stated here, if wrong, would damage my projected image.

As the saying goes, Egg would be on my face. I think this is how science should be discussed.

There's got to be a penalty for overlooking a relevant piece of information in a scientific discussion.

I chose to have a public review of my theory and never shied away from criticism. In fact, I didn't have an option other than to post it here in this corner of the internet…:) . Well, it is also published in two books.

This lack of anonymity from my side is also the reason why I asked scientists to name themselves. That makes the discussion more interesting and intellectually more honest.

Don’t be shy, just remember that everything you say will live forever in the net..:)

The word revision comes from many things in my theory. A very salient new paradigm in my theory is the Fundamental Dilator shown below:

This is called the Balls Diagram because I used Balls to denote the orientation (by the lettering orientation) and tunneling phase of the 4D spatial metric deformation coherence with respect to our 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe.

The spinning creates a stroboscopic effect (interaction only occurs when the deformations are flush with the 3D Hypersphere) which yields both Quantum Mechanics and the distinct character of the four fundamental particles (electron, proton, positron and antiproton).

On the other hand, one has to have Balls (in the figurative sense) to propose such a revolutionary model. Here Electrons, positrons, antiprotons and protons are really different phases of the same entity. I call this concept a revision of what we currently consider to be a particle.

If you had read a fraction of my theory, you would know that I proposed a paradigm where the four fundamental particles are just phases of the same metric deformation coherence.

A Horse is a Horse, of course, of course...:) and a Proton is different from an Electron, unless we are dealing with a revisionist theory (different view of the same reality) where they are the same...:)

Had you named yourself, it would be clear that you cast a comment without reading the basic tenets of my theory and egg would be on your face...:) It is just fair...:)

I would be delighted to discuss the theory with my critics - right here because this is the only place where a broad scope theory can be debated. If this were a review of my work, never in a million years could I point out that the reviewer didn't do a good job ..>:) In fact, the reviewer missed all the relevant points...:) (if you don't believe, read my other blog with the censorship events).

By the way, if I were wrong, I would love to hear a good argument. I hate wasting time and have other things to do...:)

I was asked if I received any reply from Dr. Steven Chu. I can tell that there has been a pick-up on the interest level of my theory.

Below you can see the Maploco displaying readers from several places:

Cambridge - Probably MIT's Dr Guth..>:)

Alamogordo - Most likely radioative scientists from White Sands...:) (I am guessing...:)

Berkeley - Probably some brilliant string theorist...:)

Stockholm, Sweden - Probably the Nobel Prize Committee...;)
Ithaca - Probably Dr. Paul Ginsparg..>:)

Many of my visitors do not leave comments, which is a shame...:) As you know, everyone is tempted to put down other people's ideas..>:) but very few have the courage to say something positive about someone else's controversial work..>:)

Dr Steven Chu, most likely asked our Luminaries to go and find out what this theory is about..>:)

I hope they do a better job than our well-meaning scientist. It would be inappropriate to conclude that the lack of a reply means that the theory is incorrect ...:)

The case in point is that most people have biases (e.g. an electron is a different 'particle' from a proton) and will simply discard the theory without even reading it as did the current critic. Of course, if the concept of particle were the only way to describe the immutable electron and if the electron were really immutable, then they would be right...:) I question the immutability and the concept that particle or particle-wave are the only way to describe an electron...:) Not only question, but provided an alternative description where there is no immutability and instead of a particle or particle/wave, the electron is modeled as a metric deformation coherence (thus highly mutable..:) and better described as a traveling wave-generator...

Of course, I also provided a new paradigm for interaction which yields quantum mechanics and relativity. I proposed that Relativity is in the eyes of the beholder in my posting The Image in the Mirror , that is, the hyperbolic nature of spacetime is due to the choice of equations of motion. I also solved a paradox there...:)

Using the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, the limiting velocity of light comes naturally...:)

Returning to the problem of biased critics. They might do with nice words like "well-meaning" but what is really important is that they read the theory before reaching a conclusion...:) or at least read the basic and very controversial paradigms and make a critique of them before concluding something..:)

Every so often, I repost my "The Silence of the Lambs" posting as a guide to controversy and to help critics to find their way without too much reading..>:)

I would like to make the discussion more fluent.

The Silence of the Lambs verses about the silence of the scientific community after being hit by a much simpler alternative explanation of the Universe. This would be the time that I would expect them to jump up and down and say Occam's Razor ..>:) as so many of them like to do...:) ( I hate that pompous line of speech). It contains many if not most of the controversial points of this theory in a bullet point form.

Thanks for the opportunity to point the why my theory revises science. It proposes a paradigm that provides an alternative view of particles, the cosmos etc....

Cheers,

MP

Location	Time
Astoria, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:18:18 -0500
Atlanta, GA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:38:49 -0500
Astoria, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:32:29 -0500
Euless, TX, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:13:01 -0500
Pasadena, CA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:49:54 -0500
Carrollton, TX, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:14:16 -0500
Wayne, NJ, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:59:58 -0500
Long Beach, CA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:55:51 -0500
Seoul, Korea, Republic of	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:42:11 -0500
New York, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:21:50 -0500
New York, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:02:56 -0500
Cambridge, MA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:44:35 -0500
Hoboken, NJ, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:12:14 -0500
Joliet, IL, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:50:12 -0500
, United Kingdom	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:28:26 -0500
Alamogordo, NM, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:54:06 -0500
New York, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:30:39 -0500
Bridgeport, CT, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:04:48 -0500
Bangkok, Thailand	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:22:21 -0500
Berkeley, CA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:08:46 -0500
Warren, NJ, United States	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:50:25 -0500
Wayne, NJ, United States	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:49:52 -0500
Lawrenceville, GA, United States	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:39:34 -0500

Mamaroneck, NY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:55:11 -0500
Stockholm, Sweden	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:44:47 -0500
, Europe	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:55:55 -0500
Bayonne, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 12:22:00 -0500
North Dartmouth, MA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:24:23 -0500
East Brunswick, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:04:22 -0500
Peoria, AZ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:54:04 -0500
Cambridge, MA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:07:55 -0500
Rosedale, NY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:03:06 -0500
Washington, DC, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:50:34 -0500
Montgomery, AL, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:44:59 -0500
Edison, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:44:36 -0500
Brooklyn, NY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:26:40 -0500
Ashburn, VA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:23:34 -0500
Waddy, KY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:20:14 -0500
Munich, Germany	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:00:33 -0500
Berkeley, CA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 07:23:44 -0500
Spokane, WA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:08:22 -0500
, , United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 03:03:03 -0500
Warren, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:03:54 -0500
Astoria, NY, United States	Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:08:25 -0500
Columbus, OH, United States	Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:56:47 -0500

Clifton, NJ, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 12:02:56 -0500
Nottingham, United Kingdom Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:55:07 -0500
Gatineau, QC, Canada Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:35:35 -0500
Ithaca, NY, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:33:32 -0500
Mount Kisco, NY, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 06:27:27 -0500
Yucca Valley, CA, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 04:11:30 -0500

The Luddites are coming..:)

The Luddites are coming..:)

Vedic Astrology has left a new comment on your post "The Cosmic Microwave Background":

The CMBR is well explained by the Big Bang model – when the universe was young, before the formation of stars and planets, it was smaller, much hotter, and filled with a uniform glow from its white-hot fog of hydrogen plasma. As the universe expanded, both the plasma and the radiation filling it grew cooler. When the universe cooled enough, stable atoms could form. These atoms could no longer absorb the thermal radiation, and the universe became transparent instead of being an opaque fog. The photons that were around at that time have been propagating ever since, though growing fainter and less energetic, since the exact same photons fill a larger and larger universe. This is the source for the term relic radiation, another name for theCMBR.

Maybe not..:) This comment doesn't come from a real Luddite..:) that is, from a real Inflation Theorist..:) The explanation is too imprecise to be rebutted properly.

The first problem is White-Hot Plasma... that is way too cold...:) What is the black-body temperature that corresponds to white...:) 6000 degrees is already yellow...:)

What kind of Big Bang yields just White Hot Matter??????? If you tell me that there is an initial sea of radiation that is decaying into particles, that makes more sense to me...:)

You remember... IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS THE LIGHT..:) not Hot White Plasma...:)

The Astrologist did not provide a time frame for the cooling or thermal equilibration and did not mentioned the requirement that the 15 Billion light years Universe size to be reached in an attosecond after the Big Bang..:) small details, of course...but they are worthy of comments since they require matter to travel faster than the speed of light and then stop or travel at speeds below the speed of light..:) Forget momentum conservation, that is another law that goes off the window in Inflation Theory. It begetts the question of what happens to the light that bounces back from the Universe bondary???? Can we see a reflected Universe there?....:)

Any theory that proposes a finite 3D Universe suffers from this problem. Infinite 3D Universes have bright nights..>:) One cannot win...:)

Notice that my 3D Universe is finite but cannot be traversed neither by matter nor light...:) It expands due to the natural expansion of a 3D shockwave within an infinite 4D spatial manifold. There is no need to create space out of nothing...:) space is always there, we are the stuff that is moving outwards, radially, at the speed of light. Also, nights are dark, not bright due to the expansion of the shockwave radius. Farther apart light sources suffer from Doppler Shifting and no light ever reaches from anyting farther that a radian away or 15.6 billion light years....:)

I will summarise the salient points of any physical model describing the initial few attoseconds of this Universe.

• Instead of White-Hot Plasma, consider Protons, Neutrons, Electrons surrounded by a sea of Gamma Rays.
• Inflation Theory adds to this an almost infinitely fast expansion process where the "boundaries" of the Universe (edge of it, if you will...:) quickly expanded to current positions. With the newly discovery of a continuous expansion, this image has been patched to contain a process of continuous "space creation"... Thus between any two points in the Universe, there is some space been created... I think this doesn't make absolutely any sense. Of course, almost infinitely fast expansion of the Universe means that matter would be traveling together with the boundaries at speeds larger than the speed of light...:) another offensive hypothesis.
• Considering these two hypotheses, one would expect that the almost infinitely fast expansion would NOT result in thermal equilibrium between Gamma Rays and particles. Does light also speeds up during the Inflation Period????

On the other hand an expansion yields a sudden decrease of density and that means a burst of any radiation that is not "THERMALIZED" that is a burst of Gamma Rays at the beginning of times is something to be expected..:)

As far as I know, there is no indication of any dependency of a Gamma Ray photon wavelength with the size of the Universe. As you know, the Universe is not a box and a Gamma Ray photon is closer to a localized particle than to a normal model (pure frequency) of the Universe box…J

The appropriate reading of inflation theory indicates that the initial expansion takes place in such a short time that there is not time for cooling equilibration. In addition, there is no proven relationship between "The Size of The Universe" and the wavelength of a photon traveling within it. If the Universe were to change the dimensions of everything equally as it changes its own size one would have an atom of the size of a planet...:).. Of course, the inflationary period changes only the distance between particles. On an amazing stretch of imagination one might say that it also changes the wavelength of White-Hot Plasma radiation. The scale of the inflation is such that no Gamma Ray or White-Hot Plasma radiation would survive above DC (zero frequency or thereabouts). Thus one cannot consider that whatever radiation we had at time zero, were to do a wavelength scale corresponding to the size increase of the 3D Universe...:)

The second possible physical argument that one can raise to explain the dependence of radiation wavelength with the size of the Universe is the Variable Size Resonance Cavity Model. In this model, one consider that Universe to be initially a very small box of conducting matter. Inside it, our 3D Universe were sitting hot and bothered....white-hot and bothered...:)

Under those circumstances, radiation is constrained by the permitted normal modes of the Resonance Cavity. As the cavity changes size, there is a crossing or elimination of orthogonality of the different modes and energy relaxes into the new lower modes. Under these circumstances one can consider a radiation cooling process synchronous to the change in the position of the boundaries (Resonant Cavity Dimensions). The physics is similar to considering that the photons were particles with momentum hk bouncing of the walls of this Universe Box. Adiabatic cooling happens when one changes the size of the box quickly. Pressure times Volume should remain the same, that is, larger volume implies lower pressure or lower photon momentum hk...:) This would meant that an Universe expansion would yield photons with lower momentum or larger wavelength.

This is fine and dandy, but it requires that radiation bounces back and forth off those walls during the equilibration period. In a 15 Billion Light Years Resonance Cavity this is a strech...:) In addition that it requires that end of the Universe to be a perfect conductor...:) (superconductor to be precise...:)

I hate to say, but this stinks...:) Not physical process we know would propel all the stars in the Universe at speeds almost infinitely larger than the speed of light... stop their motion after an attosecond...have a perfectly reflective End Of Universe...:) etc..

Let's review this part of the commentary:

The photons that were around at that time have been propagating ever since, though growing fainter and less energetic, since the exact same photons fill a larger and larger universe. This is the source for the term relic radiation, another name for theCMBR.

Photons do not loose energy - become less energetic by traveling through space. If that were the case one wouldn't see far aways stars... their radiation would be tired by now..:) There is a funky Tired Photon theory which I discredited in some other posting that talks about tired - less energetic photons due to traveling through distances..:) One cannot take that idea seriously... This idea has been used to keep the Universe nice and infinite...:)

Below is the simple picture I draw to explain what is the meaning of looking into the past or into the distance within our 3D Universe.

This picture was created to explain how to calculate the real age of the Universe using my proposed topology and the appropriate Hubble Law in the Pioneer Anomaly posting


Remember that we are actually looking into the past through a 4D Spatial Manifold... Also notice that light always travels along the 45 degrees direction (the shockwave is also traveling at the speed of light).

Of course, the external hypersphere is running away from the internal sphere with an speed that reaches the speed of light when the internal sphere is just a point..:)

This means that the radiation emanating from that initial 4D point has zero frequency (DC). Any radiation traveling from a slighter period would be in the microwaves, later in the visible etc...:)

Under these conditions, there is no need of thermal equilibration in an attosecond. Gamma radiation is emitted as Gamma Radiation. The observer on Earth will see it as microwaves due to the well known Doppler Effect. THIS IS A PHYSICAL THEORY. No slight of hands, no unproven relationship between exoteric non-observable (Edge of The Universe, Size of The Universe), infinitely fast matter-radiation Thermal equilibrium...etc.

Due to the symmetry of the topology, any place is the Center of The Universe. For the Narcisistic Scientist this is the Ultimate Paradigm..>:)

YOU ARE SO VAIN... I BET YOU THINK THIS THEORY IS ABOUT YOU >:) (Carly Simon)

Here everyone is happy ... you are always at the Center of the Universe... :) no matter where you are...

I think I ranted enough about that simple and imprecise paragraph.

I would like to thank the Vedic Astrologist for the opportunity to clarify my problems with Inflation Theory and to show how my much simpler explanation explains the events as well or better than the competition..:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- I would love to have scientists to pose their opinions in an up-front manner - without hiding behind the Vedic Philosophy...:) I presented a counter argument based upon my theory, which is the subject of this blog. If one presents an argument supporting another theory and I am kind enough to post it and debate it here, I would expect to receive back a correction to my counter-argument and a critique of how I use my topology to explain the same events (Big Bang).

I am looking forward to that..>:)

Letter to Dr. Steven Chu

Dear Dr. Chu,

I created a new paradigm for modeling the Cosmos and particles and ran into trouble getting over the non-scientific barriers one finds when revising science.

The paradigm shift proposes that the 3D Universe is a very thin 3D shockwave traveling at the speed of light within a 4D Spatial Manifold. Thus in my model, the Spacetime Continuum is actually 5D and there are a preferred spatial Direction (R) and an Absolute Time PHI, although both are non-observables from within the 3D Universe or 4D Spacetime Continuum.

The figure that describes such paradigm is reproduced here:

Figure 1. Two cross-sections of the Universe. The internal radius is the speed of light times the age of the Universe. The Green circle represents the 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe or just our 3D Universe (XYZ).

It should be easily verifiable that the standard relativistic reference frames (xTau and x’Tau ‘ related to each other by a Lorentz Transformation ) are at hand from inspecting the PHI.XYZ cross-section shown on the right panel of Fig 1. The left panel contains the RXYZ cross-section.

The more interesting paradigm shift is the representation of particles.

The four elementary particles (Electron, Proton, AntiProton, Positron) are represented by four phases of a metric coherences that spins as it travels at the speed of light with the 3D Shockwave Universe. The spinning makes up for an intermittent overlap of the coherence (dilator) and the 3D Universe (Fabric of Space).

The Fundamental Dilator representing the 4 elementary particles is shown below:

Figure 2. Balls Diagram representing Electron and Positron.

The different phases represent metric dilation (Green) or compression (Red). Being an Electron or a Proton indicates just a difference in displacement volume. The phases with horizontal lettering are flush (full overlap) with the 3D Space while the vertical are not thus having no footprint in it. No footprint implies no interaction. The footprint is modeled as our 3D Mass.

Below are the diagrams for Proton and AntiProton:

Figure 3. Balls diagram representing Proton and AntiProton. The change in color and orientation represents tunneling and spinning concomitant processes.

I was able to represent all hyperons accordingly. Next you can see the representation of a Pion Plus.

Figure 4. Balls Diagram for Pion Plus. This diagram represents a complex coherence with three Fundamental Dilator subcoherences.

The point I want to reach is that this representation is amenable to shifting the paradigm for nuclear reactions from Nuclear Chemistry (with reagent and product states with a barrier in the middle, transition state etc) into Nonlinear Hadronics - where particle creation is the result of nonlinear beating between two coherences.

This paradigm shift gives support for the experiment of COHERENT NUCLEAR FUSION.

Normally one, using the Nuclear Chemistry paradigm collide particles with maximum energy (temperature) such as to create fusion. This paradigm disregards length of interaction and phase-matching angle. A velocity defines and angle with the Fabric of Space and thus one can probe the metric elastic ellipsoid of revolution and find the appropriate phase matching angle.

This means that a COHERENT NUCLEAR FUSION experiment would start with particle beams traveling along the same axis. They would interact by converging under the influence of a magnetic lens. Their conversion length would be defined by their de Broglie wavelength and the focal length of the magnetic length as in a standard nonlinear optical interaction. Under perfect phase-matching condition the productions (beating) would be released at specific angles. That would facilitate energy extraction through magneto-hydrodynamics methods.

I know that this is not the most efficient manner to convey a new idea, but there isn't other available to me at this time.

I seek support for the evaluation of my ideas and/or the test of them in the aforementioned experiment.

Nuclear Chemistry experiments are not easy or cheap and are defined by committees or very invested scientists. This means that they would always be timid and always err on the side of caution and never test a new revolutionary idea.

If correct, this paradigm shift would permit the solution of energy problems, interplanetary travel etc.

Please take a second looking at my drawings. I believe someone as intelligent as you are would be able to grasp my paradigm quickly.

I will post this message on my site;
http://hypergeometricaluniverse.blogspot.com

By the way, I also derived Grand Unification equations, Cosmological Constants from first principles, explained the Pioneer Anomaly, derived Gravitational Lensing and the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion etc. Everything is posted in that blog.

Please feel free to ask me any questions or to contact me.

This is a brief exposure of an conceptually challenging revisionist theory. I am not seeking your endorsement or support. I am just mentioning that this theory if correct would lead to a novel path in energy production and that the only way to seeking this new path is through the exploration of novel paradigm (Nonlinear Nuclear Hadronics). The current paradigm wouldn’t support event the simple exploratory experiments needed to test this paradigm, that is, Science needs a theoretical base to even consider other possibilities.

My theory provides that theoretical support.

Thanks,

MP

PS_ I wrote this letter to Dr. Steven Chu in hopes that it brings attention to my new paradigm. Despite of all claims of perfect knowledge of the Universe, including mines...:) Science is still an experimental branch of knowledge. I wrote the letter trying to shortcut the arduous path of bringing a new revision to Science into the mainstream discussion. Earth could use an alternative energy solution to fossil fuels and the sooner the better. The faster I can bring this paradigm into discussion the sooner someone can decide to do the simple experiment to test the Coherent Nuclear Fusion Hypothesis.

Of course, I will continue explaining my theory here. Now there is a possibility of publishing it into a mainstream journal. I will eventually do it while doing my balancing act with life...:)

Cheers,

MP

The Silence of the Lambs

The Silence of The Lambs..:)

This blog is about to reach its 33,000 unique IP readers...:) Hurray!!!!

I didn't know there were so many cosmologists, string theorists, particle physicists in the planet...:)

There are many reasons to celebrate...

This is a rerun and a review, creating well defined claims and easy targets for criticism...:)

I said many times, I would welcome criticism and that is the reason why this blog was written in the first place - to have a public peer review since the stardard reviewing process is so INAPPROPRIATE for the review of an extensive logical framework.

The theory has been published in two books:

• Quantization in Astrophysics - containing the Grand Unification and New Cosmology Paradigm
• Hadron Physics New Energy Issues - Containing the Hypergeometrical Standard Model

not that bad for something created in the everyday commuting to work (on a shaking NYC subway..>:)

and reached the following crowning achievements...:)

1. I demonstrated that the theory provides the appropriate solutions to the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion and the Gravitational Lensing problems.
2. In the Gravitional Lensing blog, I showed how a simple reasoning about the usage of Gerber's potential could be used to show that Gerber's potential (Hypergeometrical Potential) could predict the correct Gravitational light deflection. Somehow that simple reasoning was beyond the specialists of the time and since then. Einstein, very cunningly, placed the responsibility for the demise of Gerber's ideas in the hands of the specialists at the time. Something like, I wash my hands..:)
3. I provided the solution to the Pioneer Anomaly in which I clarify the meaning of Hubble equation and the topology of looking into the past...:)
4. I provided a full description of all particles (hyperon family and isotopes).
5. I corrected Newton's equations by eliminating all non-geometrical elements of Classical Mechanics.
6. I kept the theory relativistic despite of introducing Absolute Time and a Preferential Frame of Reference or at least a preferential direction of reference (R).
7. Somehow, it seems that I introduced a geometrical interpretation of Lorentz transforms of all things... I did not hear any angry relativistic cosmologists telling me otherwise...which is a surprise... I thought everyone knew that Lorentz transform is a rotation by an imaginary angle...
8. I introduced a new model for matter... the first non-obvious model. Up to know things were waves, particles or particle-waves...:) The dilator is a wavegenerator that flows like a wave...:)
9. The Humble Fundamental Dilator shows how a proton and an electron are the same entity and have the same 4D Mass, thus simplifying tremendously the understanding and unification of the Universe.
10. The Humble Fundamental Dilator is also the hidden variable Einstein tried throoughout his whole life to find. The entity that creates Quantum Mechanics.
11. I challenged the concept of Field and showed that implicit in it is the existence of a Cosmological Coherence (all dilators in the Universe dilate in synch with their local dilaton fields). Synchronization is evident using absolute time (in the RXYZ frame).
    
    
12. I Grand Unified all the Forces (Gravitation and Electromagnetism) while providing a replacement for the Gluon-Quark paradigm (the dilator itself) and for the Electroweak force (the advent of nonlinear hadronics)...
13. In replacing the Gluon-Quark paradigm I modified the symmetry requirements for a Grand Unification or Supersymmetry Theory. The pesky Reciprocal Symmetry is eliminated and with that the need that everything very slow to have the same energy as everything very fast...:) This is an outrageous symmetry... Physicist should be kissing my ring for eliminating such nasty constraint....:)
14. I proposed the solution for all energy problems in the shape of fusion reactors while produce fusion (or fission) products along a single direction (or cone)...:) Energy is readily extracted through magneto-hydrodynamics means... Charged products make up powerful currents to be slowed down by reversed accelerators...:)
15. I proposed a new topology for the Cosmos...:) which eliminates the need for Einstein Cosmological Constant, dark energy, inflation... This at a time when inflationary people are adjusting their parameters to explain the whole chimichanga...:) Very unfortunate...:) At least at this time, I would love to say Ockham's Razor... People have already readied their acceptance speeches for the Nobel Ceremony...:) Horrible situation...:)
16. In creating this new topology, I explained why the speed of light is the limiting speed in our Fabric of Space..(3D Universe)...
17. I acknowledged that in fact things can move faster than the speed of light by traveling (surfing) along an interference pattern...:) This might be someday used to create superluminal traveling when people learn how to pattern dilaton fields...:) or die waiting to ride a Tachyon driven spacecraft...:)
18. I provided the equations to Cosmological Constants (vacuum permittivity and magnetic susceptibility).
19. I also showed that the Gravitational Constant is not constant and scaled down with the inverse of the age of the Universe....:) Earlier times had stronger Gravitational fields..>:)
20. The Gravitational "constant" dependence provides the blueprint for the demise of the Universe...:) The relaxation of the dilators... A totally new Cosmogony..>:)
21. I provided an alternative explanation for the Action-At-Distance paradox which bothered Einstein so much and that is the basis for a total delusional state of mind where people throw their hands up and accept anything..:) from time travel to time traveling backwards in Black Holes ... to Black Holes...:)
22. I also provided an alternative explanation for the Double Slit Experiment. In my theory, dilators (electron included) travel on a four dimensional space at the center of a horospherical reference frame. The waves it creates are the same it surfs, that is, the electron surfs a four-dimensional wave (dilaton field) and by simple projection, it also surfs the 3D projection (de Broglie waves). This means that the de Broglie wave is not a matter wave. Instead, it is a metric deformation wave created by the dilator. The much larger wavelength is due to the way things are projected in an hyperbolic space... The electron in the two slit experiment will travel through a single slit while its dilaton field projection will travel through both...:) On the other side of the barrier, the electron will continue to surf the interferometric dilaton fields and thus will deposit itself on an interferometric pattern onto the detector..:) Very simple and again I would love to say, Ockham's Razor... despite my qualms about its usage...:)
23. I provided a simple multi-coherence (dilator dimensional chords) description for each and every hyperon and isotope (isotopes are trivial since they only have protons and neutrons)...: )
24. I provided an alternative solution to the mass paradigm by assigning it to an overlapping 4D volume (dilator overlapping with the fabric of space at specific phases of the dilator spinning).
25. I created an extrinsic representation for the Spin.... that obscure quantity that bothered so many quantum physics students for so long...:) and explained What the Hell is the meaning of 1/2 ... as you might know rotation description does not include any quadratic potential and thus there isn't any zero point rotation....:) It was always a bothering 1/2 to me...:)
26. In making Spin extrinsic, I introduced the delightful Girlfriend on a Swing Gedanken Experiment to show how time could be Pseudo-Quantized..>:)
    
27. I corrected all Newton's equations (Four of them) and provided the really relativistic Biot-Savart law. That law can be used to project better Tokamaks if that is the way one wants to proceed.
28. Einstein also got his share...:) In creating an Absolute Time and explaining the meaning of inertia, I rebutted Mach's principle of nonlocal interaction and restored Newton's Absolute Time..>:) which times the existence of the Universe as opposed to our short existence...:)
    
29. I did all this by looking into what people did right and throwing away without fear what people did wrong...:) That was easy since I don't have to write this as a grant to my reactionary peers..:)
30. Most of all, I told you that the most important outlet for Physics - The Cornell-Los Alamos E-Print Repository should be in the hands of someone more capable than Paul Ginsparg. It is a shame Science can be silenced by arbitrary actions of a single person...:)

I also pleaded for my Lambs not to remain silent and to speak up their minds. I value criticism and would be happy to post any one of your meaningful comments. I know that in those thirty thousand readers many are scientists (professional scientists).

What I expect from them is either a statement telling me that I made a mistake here or there or some active action against the barriers that precluded a more wider distribution of this theory, namely, to request, demand that my theory receives a 1 megabyte space on the Cornell-Los Alamos E-Print Repository hard drive..:) NOT TOO MUCH TO ASK...:)

I've fulfilled all the requirements to post the theory there... (already peer-reviewed, published work that has been endorsed)...:)

Double-click the Bird below to find out more..>:)

I would welcome anyone to take the initiative to publish my paper on the Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives. :)

The pdf is here. This is a shorter version of the theory. Just below 1 megabyte length. It was accepted and endorsed the last time I attempted posting it there.

As I mentioned, I would be eternally grateful to anyone (My Giordano Bruno) that would bring this work to a wider audience through posting it at the Arxives or through forwarding this blog link or the pdfs to other people...

Considering that this theory provides a new paradigm for Coherent Nuclear Fusion, the planet you might save might be yours...:)

Feynman wouldn't blink in face of this challenge...:)

The current version of the work is here.

I know that if you do so, Paul Ginsparg might place you on his blacklist. I know that I am not a professional scientist any longer..:) I know it all....

I also know the VALUE OF IDEAS and that they are worth fighting for. I don't expect any thing less from a scientist (professional or not)...

Just think, "What would Richard P. Feynman do????"

Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars - mere globs of gas atoms. I, too, can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more? Richard P. Feynman

Don't make me explain analogies:

• Poets - String Theorist, Supersymmetrists...Gauge Physicists...:)
• the Beauty of the Stars - The Beauty of Weyl Fermions, Higgs, Bosons, Dirac Matrices, etc...
• Mere globs of gas atoms - My humble and simple theory
• Feynman - The little me...

Cheers,

MP

PS- Since the first release of this blog, I had the opportunity to discuss my theory with Craig Markwardt from JPL. I will present the discussion in its interity soon.

I wonder if my friends from the Laser Laboratory at UofR or at the Fermi Lab are reading the changes in paradigm for nuclear fusion....:) I once told Professor Huizenga while attending a party at his house, that I knew how to make a Gamma Ray laser... He looked very surprised and most likely somewhat amused..>:)

I am sure that in his mind briefly passed those concerns about the problems pumping an ultrafast decaying nuclear transition, etc... As usual, people can only think within the paradigms they lived by...I wasn't able to create any interest in that brief interaction...:)

I told the same thing to Gary Holton many years ago... Life is full of hits and misses...As usual , I would love to hear from my friends at UPenn, Princeton, Berkeley, UofChicago..>:) CERN, Steven Hawking comes to mind, the 5Dimension Centre, USAF, Whiteman Airforce Base, The Institute for Advanced Studies, well, the Devil Himself (I mean, Paul Ginsparg).....>:)

Hunger

Hunger

Life is challenging. Every so often one feels the need for a pick me up...:) Some people play the Lottery...:) I hate to lose money so I try not... but it is Human Nature...

When all the stars dim out in the sky - paraphrasing the last chapter of the Lord of The Rings...:)
when all hope is gone... some giant Eagles will come to rescue...:)

I felt like that not too long ago and reached out to a Fortune Cookie just to get this one...:)

Of course, I read my fortune on those fortune cookies...:) and totally believe that everything happens for no reason whatsoever... at least the events of chance - without direct causal linkages...

I felt silly ... made fun by a cookie...:)

Eventually I found reasons to be hopeful.

A student from University of Illinois sent me this nice email asking me questions. Since I know the horror of censorship by the establishment I will ellipse his/her name. I always try to do no harm... the first rule of hypercivilisation.. The second is to try to help.

This is another example of student engagement that makes me very hopeful someday people will fully understand my simple theory.

Dear MP,

I am a Physics undergraduate at the University of Illinois at Chicago and am about to finish up my Bachelor's in Science. The current models just don't cut it for me and so I am always looking for a new, more intuitive explanation for our observed phenomena. So when i came across your blog, i was very excited and intrigued. I have downloaded your latest paper and am slowly working through it, though i have hit a conceptual roadblock. I can not get my head around your concept of the fundamental dilator.

I can see it as a this perturbation that tunnels between two finite potential wells.

But the notation regarding spin is confusing me (the notation in Figure 4 in your paper titled "The Hypergeometrical Universe"). What exactly are these spins?
also, and i guess more fundamentally, what do you mean by "I modeled “particles” as coherences between 4D stationary states of metric
deformation." Namely, what is this coherence you bring up repeatedly?

Lastly, I was wondering if you are free within the next few months (as i am on summer break) to meet in person and talk to me about your model? I am in Chicago but am willing to travel to meet with you.

Thank you for you time and contributions to the field.

Best,
--

Name withheld by MP...:)

Well, how not to be hopeful with the future of Mankind when one faces the intellectually curious youth.

I will reproduce my quickly jotted down answer and try to fill in the blanks that I might had missed in my first attempt.

Sorry taking so long to reply. I rarely reads this email. Please use comments or send me email to ny2292000@yahoo.com.

I am preparing myself to go to work so I will be brief here. If you be so kind, I will use your question in the blog such that everyone can learn.

I certainly believe that my theory provides a better framework for describing the Universe than the rest. I would be happy to meet you in NYC or if you could arrange a little student gathering in Chicago, I would be happy to provide a brief talk about the theory.

Figure 4 contains the rotating double potential well associated with the fundamental dilator coherences. The fundamental dilator coherence is a coherence between two metric deformational states. This theory seeks how much one can say without defining details and what can be learn from that. This simple picture does not provide you with any information about the potential wells themselves but provides a picture that can be mapped to particles.

The spinning corresponds to a rotation on a four dimensional Cartesian manifold where the dilator not only spins (rotates around axes perpendicular to R (R is perpendicular to the Fabric of Space or our 3D lightspeed traveling hyperspherical shockwave universe). The dimensions associated with each state corresponds to metric deformation axes. I envision the dilator as a shape-shifting spinning hyper-ellipsoid of revolution. It has three axes as opposed to two axis in the standard ellipsoid of revolution.

The axis corresponds of a change in distance felt by two points on radially opposing directions to the ellipsoid.

The spin half which always bothered me as a graduate student is a relationship between spinning and tunneling.

If one considers the fourth axis to be very thin or Nil, the overlap of this ellipsoid is only not null when the dilator finite axes are flush against the fabric of space. This creates the stroboscopic Universe and preserves the character of our fundamental particles (electron, proton, positron, antiproton). They are just different phases of this coherence.

In summary, the intrinsic rotation (spin) is made extrinsic ( an actual rotation) in my theory.

By the way, I have a great friend at the University of Illinois. He works at the Supercomputer Center.

Please feel free to ask any questions, propose problems and just criticize the theory. I will defend it as I can.

I placed the theory on the web because I wasn't able to receive any meaningful criticism other that INAPPROPRIATE (see the censorship of my theory sister blog).

I believe the theory will percolate the community in the next few years. It takes time for people to understand something new. By the way, the spinning creates the stroboscopic universe and also solves the problem of how to abridge the gap between classical and quantum mechanics.

I explained already how to do it, but I didn't apply the theory to a hydrogen atom. I used the Quantum Lagrangian Principle to derive the forces.

Cheers,

MP



Figure 4 is shown below:

There are a few salient aspects in this diagram. The first is that I maintained a notation that parallels the Quark composition of particles in the Standard Model. They have a different meaning and serve a different purpose. In the Standard Model, they correspond to quarks up and down (2/3, 1/3 respectively). In my case, they correspond to the axis lengths of a hyperellipsoid of revolution (an ellipsoid of revolution with three axis as opposed to two).

I chose an hyperellipsoid but I could equally well had chosen a hyper parallelepiped...:) What matter is that it has three axes and thus defines a volume. In my case, it is a displacement volume. A displacement volume is the volume that disappears or appears as the dilator tunnels from state to state.

If one conceive the four dimensional Cartesian space where our hyperspherical expanding 3D Universe exists as an elastic medium, then the tunneling by the dilator generates waves on a pristine space. Pristine is only the outwards of the hyperspherical Universe. The inwards (corresponding to the region inside the Hypersphere) is not pristine and is full of dilatons but no dilator. All dilators travel at the speed of light with the shockwave Universe.

In the email, I was asked about what spins

Figure 4 contains the rotating double potential well associated with the fundamental dilator coherences. The fundamental dilator coherence is a coherence between two metric deformational states. This theory seeks how much one can say without defining details and what can be learn from that. This simple picture does not provide you with any information about the potential wells themselves but provides a picture that can be mapped to particles.

The spinning corresponds to a rotation on a four dimensional Cartesian manifold where the dilator not only spins (rotates around axes perpendicular to R (R is perpendicular to the Fabric of Space or our 3D lightspeed traveling hyperspherical shockwave universe). The dimensions associated with each state corresponds to metric deformation axes. I envision the dilator as a shape-shifting spinning hyper-ellipsoid of revolution. It has three axes as opposed to two axis in the standard ellipsoid of revolution.

The axis corresponds of a change in distance felt by two points on radially opposing directions to the ellipsoid.

The spin half which always bothered me as a graduate student is a relationship between spinning and tunneling.

If one considers the four axis to be very thin or Nil, the overlap of this ellipsoid is only not null when it is flush against the fabric of space. This creates the stroboscopic Universe and preserves the character of our fundamental particles (electron, proton, positron, antiproton). They are just phases of this coherences.

In summary, the intrinsic rotation (spin) is made extrinsic ( an actual rotation) in my theory.

One has to wrap one's minds around a shape shifting object, translating at the speed of light that also spins. In doing so, its overlap with our 3D Universe - also translating at the speed of light- changes from "Zero" to a volume that corresponds to a proton or an electron or an antiproton or a positron.

Note that there is intrinsically a tempo for all those transaction. If they were to happen out of phase the resulting interaction would be null. Thus one can envision the quantization of spin as real or the result of observation. Anything without that quantization wouldn't be detected in our Universe.
My position is that the quantization happened at time zero - when the initial bipolar macroscopic metric deformation decayed into the matter with which we are familiar.

I wasn't able to make a good figure or to make some animation. It would be great.

The best I could come up with was the Fundamental Dilator shown in this figure.

The colors indicate dilation or contraction of the local metric, the lettering orientation indicates the orientation of the dilator phase largest cross-section with respect to the 3D Universe. Horizontal lettering means total overlap with the 3D Universe. Perpendicular lettering results in zero overlap with the 3D Universe, thus those phases are not detected, but they produce a dilaton field (metric waves) since their contributions add coherently to the contributions of prior phases. Remember that even though I draw this phases along an horizontal line, they are occurring along the radial direction. The radial direction is perpendicular to the 3D Universe.

I mentioned in my theory that it provides the link between Classical and Quantum Mechanics. I used this link to calculate from first principles all the forces.

I did not use it to model the Hydrogen Atom for instance. I was hopping someone would ask me that simple question and I would advise them on how to do it. Time has passed by and I will be tackling this problem soon. Of course, I welcome help.

The last question is about what is the meaning of modeling particles as coherences between deformational states.

Well, let pick up a few examples. The electron and antielectron shown in the fundamental dilator diagram corresponds to the eternally (almost) repeating coherence show in the double potential well diagram. Depending upon which phase is in phase with the 3D Universe, one would observe one or the other particle. Observation is the result of stroboscopic interaction.

If you study Fourier series you know that overlapping sinusoidals only yield a non-zero integral if there is a frequency relationship between them. They should have the same underlying frequency to yield a non-zero integral Here we have the same problem, when two particles interact they change shape and thus attraction (repulsion). If in one phase they attract each other and in the other they repel each other, the resulting interaction is null. This would be the case of a Neutron. A neutrino has a different frequency component. The neutrino coherence is not between the ground states of the double potential well, but between the excited states of the double potential well.

Let's pick up another example:

This pion plus coherence repeats itself until it decays into an positron and a gamma ray. The gamma ray is the result of the decay of the electron-positron subcoherences.

The pion is actually a trimmer. Within the 3D space it will always look as structured to to its three components. There is a degeneracy on which phase is in phase with the 3D Universe. The three states coexist and provide an extra degree of freedom (orbital angular momentum or helicity).

Particles are derived form the Fundamental Dilator since most of the matter in the Universe is made of it and the particles interact with the Universe, thus they should contain its fundamental component.

Thanks for giving me hope...:)

Cheers,

MP

The Meaning of Material Existence

The Meaning of Material Existence

If you are a curious reader you might had noticed that this is a rerun - that is, I decided that since I am extremely busy to post prior postings for people to read the blog at leasure pace.

When I wrote this posting, I was struggling with the single-sideness of the coherence. At this point, I was considering that the dilator would be exiting the 3D manifold because the double potential well had a center of mass around our 3D space and by rotating, the dilator phase would go into and out of our 3D space. This paradigm was later replaced by a more coherence perspective where the stroboscopic nature of Nature is assigned to a different thickness along the Radial direction (thin along that direction). This means that the disappearance act is due to a change in 3D volume overlap..:)

The information is always here but it takes time to scroll 1000 pages and find what you want. Since I wrote about the meaning of material existence and proposed the intermitence of existence, I was able to better characterize how our existences were flashing before our eyes..:)

The paradigm of a Maser or a Double Well is fine but a refinement is to consider that matter is made of dilators which rotate in a four dimensional spatial manifold. Since we live in the lightspeed expanding 3D hyperspherical Universe, the rotation makes the dilator's footprint to change in size - disappearing for all but two phases within the spin cycle.

The intermitent existence comes from "I interact therefore I exist" paradigm. Particles that exist in frequencies different from that of the Fundamental Dilator do not interact and are considered to have zero mass, zero charge etc. Of course, under collisions that averaging does not necessarily goes to zero. If one makes the collisional time to be short them it is possible to detect them...;) Neutrinos are examples of those particles.

For the curious reader, the Fundamental Dilator Paradigm will be reviewed soon but you can just look into the side panel and find them...:)

-----------------------------------

I believe that the simplest picture for matter is one of a coherence within a lightspeed radially traveling four-dimensional “rotating double potential well”… Again, I am driven by physical considerations…
The Nitrogen atom in the Maser have existence in one side of the hydrogen plane and disappears from existence in that side of the hydrogen plane with an oscillating frequency equal to the difference in energy between these two states divided by h (Planck constant). This is a coherence, that is, the real state is a linear combination of two states of different energies (frequencies). The difference in energy is what creates the beating.



Figure 1. This figure shows a double potential well representing the energy levels of an out-of-plane vibration of Nitrogen in Ammonia. The space dimension is the distance from the Hydrogen Plane. This Figure was borrowed from the internet and its availability is greatly acknowledged and thanked for.

In the case of Ammonia, the finite potential barrier in the middle allows for tunneling and that in itself results in a splitting of equal energy levels located on both potential wells. The difference in energy between these new hybrid levels will define the frequency of beating. In the case of Ammonia, the potential wells are symmetric and the beating frequency is in the microwave region. The probability of the Nitrogen being found in one side of the Hydrogen plane is equal to the probability of the Nitrogen to be found in the other side of the plane.

In the case of an “Existing Particle” – material existence of a particle will be explored later in this work – it can be thought as a coherence between a massive and a massless states of the multidimensional space. The massless state lies outside the 3-D space along the radial direction. Their nature is of an eigenstate of spatial deformation (4-D space) potential rotating double well.

The mass of different particles /state of space deformation is defined by the different probabilities of being found in the massive side of the potential well. That explains the large variety of particle masses.

ParticleMass is a 3-D footprint (in the 3-D Universe we know) while they walk and tumble along the radial direction.

This in a nutshell is the reason why different particles have different rest masses.

You have to remember that in the theory particles always rotate (tumble) around the direction perpendicular to the plane XR (YR, ZR)..Those tumblings correspond to the Pauli spin (sigmax, sigmay, sigmaz)…Other quantum numbers can be obtained using similar reasoning…

The meaning of Material Existence implies that as the molecule tumbles it should set foot on the 3-D space at multiples of the de Broglie wavelength… At this time, I am not explaining some other details of the meaning of Mass… It is an elaborate argument…I will explain later..

Basically, to exist is to set foot on the Hyperspherical Universe Shock Wave every so often… If the phase is not correct, things don’t exist…

To exist is to be phase-matched with the Hyperspherical Shock-Wave Universe.
That is also the basic condition for Nuclear Chemistry.

The potential well is not symmetric (the radial direction and the 3-D shell are not symmetric)… thus the occupation number on each side of the well are not equal….That is the reason for the different masses associated with different particles… just an occupation number on a “rotating four-dimensional asymmetric “double” well” … I say “double” because one of the sides is triply degenerated (3-D side or Universe side)…

A simple problem…

PS- The maximum potential mass of a particle is proportional to the absolute value of its charge...:) Hadrons have three dimensional footprints in the 3-D Universe we know.. Mesons have two dimensional footprints...

From that you can imagine that the maximum mass of an electron is equal to the maximum mass of a proton and that is pretty close to the mass of a neutron...:)

I will introduce the HyperGeometrical Universe Standard Model next. I skipped the derivation of the Biot-Savart Law because it is convoluted to explain in a blog...but it is in the papers

I am not covering the Cosmogenesis because it is too simple... albeit conceptually straining..:) I might explain if there is interest...

I hope you are happy to understand the Meaning of Material Existence. Please feel free to ask any questions.

Cheers,

MP

Gravitation 101

Gravitation 101 and the Holy Grail of Physics

First things first... You have been a resilient reader and have been seen the trademark HyperGeometrical Universe Expanding Hyperspherical picture above time after time... It is about time for me to explain the exact meaning of each line.

The first thing you notice is a green circle - this is the cross-section of what we know as our 3-D Universe. X is any direction. Notice that the model defines that the radius of curvature is equal to the dimensional age of the Universe (c - lightspeed times the age of the Universe - circa 15 billion years). The exact age of the Universe was calculated in another blog using the Pioneer Anomaly as an experimental results.

Also notice that even though the curvature is defined by the motion along the fourth-coordinate, this is not the curvature that is referred to in General Relativity. That curvature is measure between the 3-D Universe and PROPER TIME. That curvature is influence by velocity and mass here and in the General Relativity.

The curvature depicted in the Hypergeometrical Universe ICON is measured between the 3-D Universe and the ABSOLUTE TIME or the RADIAL DIRECTION.

The curvature in the figure relates to the Hubble expansion process. Simple geometric considerations indicate that the average receding speed between two points of the Universe is c*Fi , where Fi is the Cosmological Angle. For a π radian angle (opposing points in the shock wave Universe) would result in a receding velocity of π*c. Notice that Universe expansion in this model does not requires any Dark Energy or Antigravitational Force although we do have Antigravitation in it. Antigravity will be covered in the HyperGeometrical Universe Standard Model.

The receding speed for two points separated by one radian is c, that is, at one radian the average Hubble speed will be c and any radiation from that region will appear in the microwave region due to Doppler effect. This means also that one can never reach any point after one radian from where you are, the further you travel, the further the one radian point recedes. One can never observe any event that is moving away from you faster than the speed of light, one cannot see any point further from you by one Cosmological Radian.

The initial space fluctuation was a little Hypersphere prior to breaking apart into all the particles of the Universe. Due to symmetry (perfect Hypersphere), the initial decomposition occurred in all places of the Universe. This means that wherever you are is where the Big Bang occurred. It also means that if you look far away (with a telescope), you will see the beginning of times or thereabouts. I will digress about the meaning of time later. These inital fluctuations will be covered in the Hypergeometrical Universe Cosmogenesis.

The second fine point in the figure above are the time projections:
1. Radial Time (Absolute)
2. Dimensional Time τ (Relative)
3. Cosmological Absolute Time Φ

Follow the Yellow Brick Road to learn about time projections and a simple way of thinking in five dimensions. You will also learn why τ is called Dimensional Time when it is clearly a direction in the Four-Dimensional space. If you didn't go to the Yellow Brick Road, I will like to tell you that along that direction lies actually two directions (one direction and one projection) because linear motion is equivalent to two rotations. One around the axis perpendiculat to XΦ and another around the axis perpendicular to XR. One angle is imaginary and the other is real, respectively.

Now it starts to become clear that the motion of the particle is actually in a five dimensional space (four physical dimensions and a time) and at the speed of light, being the three dimension motion just a drift. If you need to review supporting arguments about the last statement click here.

Rotations imaginary or otherwise will reproduce nice relationships between waves. The imaginary angle rotation will produce Relativity, since it is a Lorentz transform. Here the directions are proper time and X.

The real angle rotation will reproduce a nice visual relationship between the wave decomposition components (τ Direction propagating wave and the X direction propagating wave).

Now that you know what the figure means, you can see the Holy Grail of Physics (of course, if this is correct - you have my word on it... after all, I've never lied to you before ...:)

I couldn't resist and reproduced the Grand Unification Equation below...
The total waveform is given by:

The Gradient of this waveform should be set to zero and the closest maxima to each particle found. Notice that there is a k-vector in the equation. The k-vector has to be modified for particles in motion (magnetism from DC currents and electromagnetism from AC-currents). The modification is the appropriate Lorentz transformation and it is how I derived the Biot-Savart equation. The derivation will be presented later.

This equation shows a body with N dilators (X Particles) interacting with another with just one.

Notice that the first has a cosine on the denominator while the other doesn't. The reason for that is the usage of a "Short Wavelength Approximation". The large mass wave contribution is thought to have a small wavelength, thus the cosine oscillation is extremely fast. This means that maxima due to that contribution are bound to be extremely closely together. The oscillatory cosine is approximated by a constant.

Notice that there is a P factor that relates to the dimensionality of the decay. Notice that the "field" equations are two dimensional (cross-sections) and that the decay happens in terms of the increasing circular perimeter. The perimeter increases in terms of the number of spatial dimensions (3) plus spin*(fourth-dimension). For example, for a particle of spin half P would be 3.5. For a particle of spin zero (neutral matter) P would be 3.

It is slight complicated to understand that a body (collection of dilators) is perfectly lined up with the space in which it is embedded.

THE HOLY GRAIL OF PHYSICS









This work makes a huge claim: to be the source of the Holy Grail of Physics.

It is or maybe it isn't the Grand Unification Theory. This model changes paradigm to do so, based on a solid argument of an expanding 4-Dimensional Hyperspherical Shock-Wave Universe.

This is, of course, unexpected and to some degree some might argue that it has a lower level of sophistication (mathematical sophistication). The theory, on the other hand, is laden with physical insight guiding each and every hypotheses and simplifications.

This theory was created during a period of six months, while riding the subway in New York City during my commuting. It was never intended to be complete and to rewrite all physics. It was meant to be just my opinion and something for people to build upon.

It turned out that Holy Grail is a very appropriate description of any work in this area. I bothered to review the Science Status Quo throughout my life. After my initial insight, it became clear to me that these ideas should be investigated further and that drove my subsequent efforts in communicating them.

Raiders of the Lost Ark

In the Raiders of the Lost Ark, people also find the Holy Grail and discover that just its sight is enough to explode their Brains while melting face, eyeballs etc...:) A really horrendous sight..:)

It turned out that this is a good explanation why I cannot find feedback on this theory. Anyone who has any competing ideas, will peddle theirs and never read anything else seriously. The simple sight of a competitor's theory would be enough to make one's thoughts impure and thus make their theory fraudulent to some degree. I don't think that this is the case, myself. I believe many of us were able to create half-baked ideas and those half-baked ideas could be great contributions if they were the subject of strong intellectual scrutiny. By defending one's ideas, one make them more solid (better baked).

I believe that this is the explanation for the lack of any serious scrutiny, which would be welcome...

Of course, I speak a different language, but the basic claim of this model should scream OBVIOUSLY CORRECT or OBVIOUSLY INCORRECT... One cannot have an indifferent position about an Universe flying at the speed of light...:)

This is a departure from anything that is SANE IN SCIENCE (although I believe it is the correct paradigm.:).

Come to the Light and let me know your thoughts. I place a CONTACTME button on purpose to get any one of your opinions...:) Preferably knowledgeable opinions, but I will be glad to see anything relevant on my mailbox...:)

Cheers,

MP

May the Force be with You, Not

May The Force be With You, Not




In this posting, I discuss the irrelevance of the Force concept. In fact, when Newton decided to express his second law in terms of Force, Mass and acceleration, he missed the opportunity to create the purely geometrical theory - The Hypergeometrical Universe :)

This is the most important installment of the theory. You have been told that you are strong, can pull up big weights, big biceps etc... Luke Skywalker was told that the Force should be with him....etc...

The only thing I can tell you is to Forget The Force.... It will not do anything to help you with The Grand Unification... By the way, Forget The Field... It doesn't help either... at least at this stage... Later, you can come back and redefine everything in your own words....

Now that you forgot, Force... Forget Mass... Forget Charge... One cannot Unify anything with those constructs...

Now, think about what is the goal of mechanics (Gravitation), electrostatics, electromagnetism... The goal is to explain why things move by action at distance...:)

The HU Theory describes the Universe as a Four-Dimensional Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Surface. You might imagine what I was thinking... Dilatons are spacewaves... What waves do?... During my thoughts, I remembered the tropical storms that stranded me in the room in the backward of my childhood home... Mini lakes separated me from the main house and there was nothing to do other than to look at the hypnotical waves ...

Many years passed by and I had to face waves again...This time they were four-dimensional and my little pond was actually the whole Universe hurling through the four-dimensional space at the speed of light... (four-dimensional space equal five-dimensional spacetime).

The first challenge is what property or symmetry to pay attention?.... The second problem is how to think in four-dimensions, that is, how to simplify the problem such as to be able to fit inside my Brain...

The solution to the first problem are Lorentz transforms... The solution to the second problem is the usage of cross-sections... The Solution to the third problem is 42 or the Pendulum of Brahma...

The Pendulum of Brahma is an allegory that states that the Pendulum swings and every time is passes again, it is at a different place (different four-dimensional spacetime coordinate in Relativity or different fifth-dimensional spacetime coordinate in HU). The Universe is never the same, it moves forward every time the Pendulum of Brahma Passes By.

de Broglie proposed that matter has an equivalent wavelength (de Broglie wavelength) that identifies the equivalent wave in the particle-wave duality. The Pendulum of Brahma corresponds to each de Broglie wavelength expansion of the whole Universe. This will become clearer later...

The theory does not need the definition of Mass, Charge etc.. to predict action at distance. It needs those definitions for calibration with what we know.

Let's start with the easy "Force", Gravitation. - to be continued tomorrow...:)

Hope Springs Eternal

Hope Springs Eternal

When I decided to blog this theory, I hoped that it would generate enough interest and bring more scrutiny to it. While creating it, I tried to get people to read it without success.

I am not from this field and learned that outsiders are outcasts in any situation. This theory was created by an outsider and I believe that is why it is so different, creative and probably correct...:)

Many people following the same idea, repeating the same Mantras, Higgs Bosons, Conjecture This etc... will never be able to think outside that vocabulary.

It has been said, that the theory of everything would require a new vocabulary, meaning a new set of mathematical constructs, new theorems etc...

It was never said, the theory of everything would require a fresh perspective...:) Before scalating complexities for complexity sake, one should see if one can find simplifying assumptions. I looked around and found a few.

Well, let's not be too involved with one's own ideas and restate this as, there should be a place in the literature for ideas which are not the one's which are the mainstream, giving that they have a rational support. I believe my ideas fall into that category.

"Can't we all get along???? (hypergeometricists, string theorists, conjecturists...:)

I failed to get through their spam-killer software last time I tried to contact the leaders in this field (positive thinking).

I decided to take a new try now that the theory is nicely presented in a blog...:) and I will be contact a few scientists in hopes to make the theory more widely available...:)

In the next few blogs I will make public the results of my efforts.

Hope Springs Eternal..:)


Cheers,

MP

Why do things move?

Why do things move?




Mostly likely you never asked yourself this question? In fact this is actually two questions:

1. Why things move when they are subjected to a force?
2. Why they keep moving afterwards (after the force is not in place any longer)?

The answer to the first question is due to the fact that constraint forces do no do any work. They are perpendicular to motion and thus cannot do work even if they wanted..:) They are not lazy...:)

The theories before mine were built on the base of Classical Mechanics and use Lagrangians and minimization principles. Those principles have built-in concepts of Potentials, momentum, mass etc... Using them one could not create my theory. The reason being is that one has to go one step below. One has to use the reasoning of lazy constraining forces not doing any work and avoid introducing the concept of force.

Instead of thinking about Force, I thought about de Broglie (or Compton if you so prefer) stepwise hyperspherical expansion of the 4-Dimensional Universe Shock Wave. Minimization of the contraint forces means in this perspective having the dilators to be in phase with surrounding dilations caused by other dilators. Notice that this means that all dilators are in phase with each other dilations at each swing of the Pendulum of Bhrama or de Broglie step.

This in sync stepwise motion is the source of Quantum Mechanics and allows for the addition of wave amplitudes as opposed to their squares. I call this a Cosmological Coherence. It is the reason why radiation (spacetime dilatons) generated from each and every atom of your body to add up to form an extensive property, that is, the field amplitude is proportional to the number of dilators.

This simplifies the theory and makes it a simple theory of everything.

Now returning to the problem of why things move (inertially). Inertia can be thought as the resistence spacetime generates when subject to deformation. The space has a spring constant (which I used to calculate the natural frequency of spacetime waves or gravitational waves and the number is 42!!!!)..... Just kidding...but it is not that far from 42...:)

Thinking along those lines, a body that is traveling has all its dilators siting on a shock wave that has a local distortion. This figure shows that local deformation of the spacetime as arrow 1, which is not perpendicular to the hyperspherical shell any longer. Motion happens as the hyperspherical Universe expands. Notice that moving from the situation 1 to the situation 3 resulted in the elimination of spacetime stress. The k-vector on situation 3 is perpendicular to the hyperspherical shell and will move away from the original point with the same velocity as always, its Hubble velocity...:) albeit remained fixed onto the Fabric of Space...:)

That space distortion will travel to the point in the Universe where the distortion is relaxed. When it reaches that point it will stop and site onto the relaxed Fabric of Space. Surprisingly, due to the expansional character of the Shock Wave Universe, it will be seem as moving at constant speed (its local Hubble speed) forever.

This is the reason for motion and this is the logical complement to Newton's First Law!

Next, I will explain why things move when subjected to a "Force".

Cheers,

MP

SuperStrings

SuperStrings






First I have to say that the research in SuperStrings or any other tremendously mathematical theory is valuable and has been set forth by brilliant minds. In addition, the theories might really being brought back from the 23rd Century and be totally correct.

Secondly, I have to say something that might help you see other perspectives with an open mind.

Here is what I have to say:

There is a bothering aspect in the present search for the theory of everything.
There are precepts on how the theory should look like.

Unseeming comments like the claim that String Theory is a theory from the 23rd Century (thus should be correct) are not scientific. It delegates all other
attempts to second best just by using that empty statement.

I see the big picture although I might fail to see the details. The big picture is that superstrings are supposed to replicate energy levels (mass) of particles and the different types of bosons that convey the so called Forces. The problem is that SuperSring boundary conditions create evenly spaced energy levels (the length of the string is a multiple of the wavelength associated with an specific state). All the contortions of creation of Tori, folding the space in membranes etc are used to try to compresses those strings into submission to yield the observed particles and bosons.

The fact that the superstring is supposed to be extremely small means that there will be a lot of trouble to make matter out of them (to find states that are low enough to accommodate the observed particles' masses).

The fact that the strings are floppy also means that they do not have nice moments of inertia and thus are not good to be modeled for quantized rotational energy levels. In my theory, I used the rotations to replicate the intrinsic quantized quantum numbers. Superstring, Kaluza-Klein theories use compact curved spaces to replicate the same property. That results in dimensional inflation, that is, the inflation in required the number of dimensions. I believe that it is more likely the existence of a soliton that has a well defined moment of inertia tensor embedded in a simpler space than to have a utterly complicated space membrane that sometimes foams..>:)

I think it is too much work for a simple string. In this theory, I divided the problem into many:

1. First, find out how many forces are out there... I found only one "force" that reproduces Gravitation and Electromagnetism. Light speed expanding Universe means that E=mc^2 is kinetic in origin, thus there shouldn't be any potential energy stored.
2. I proposed a particle X (four-dimensional ellipsoid of revolution) that can provide all the structure associated with experimental nuclear scattering.
3. Particle X axes are modeled after the Quark Composition of matter and thus provide anisotropic collisional cross-sections.
4. The dilatons decay in a quantized manner as a function of the number of waves and not spatial distance. This is certainly new. Asymptotic freedom or spherical symmetric collisions are recovered if one managed to get the particles close enough (high energy collisions).
5. Another problem to be solved is the nature of the solitonic state of these four-dimensional dilators (X Particles). For this, I believe it is just necessary to create a simple potential for space deformation and derive the dilator states (particles masses).
6. Another problem that HU Models solves is the explanation for the intrinsic quantum states. Charm, Spin etc are modeled as rotations (tumbling) of these four-dimensional dilators.
7. Weak force is modeled as a Relativistic Hadronic Nonlinear Wave Scattering problem and it naturally lead to hadronic lasers.
8. Next to last, I have to mention that this is a first viewing (nobody wanted to read it) of this theory and thus it is in the same level (perhaps better) than the first research papers on Quantum Mechanics, when people were discussing if Schrodinger equation should be linear or non-linear, etc. I am proposing a framework with well defined hypotheses and some initial results (Grand Unification). I don't have access to particle physics data and thus there is work left to be done all over the place. This means that if you are interested and have the appropriate background, I would certainly welcome collaborators.

Last but not least, the theory not only proposes that the Universe is traveling at the speed of light but tells you that you are composed of four-dimensional particles (tumbling 5-D spacetime solitons). I tell you, this has to be a difficult pill to swallow...:)

Cheers,

MP

How Science is Done These Days

How Science is Done These Days




This is a preemptive strike against people who thinks that the language of the theory lacks mathematics...:)

If you are a theoretician in this area, you will know what I mean. This field has tremendous difficulties. The field has become more and more mathematical and abstract, to the point that many theoreticians work in Universes that have nothing to do with this one.

Some people talk about how to create an Universe or if there are many Universes around... It is easy to come up with an infinite number of Universes. Say, let's pick up a Pagelike Universe (a 3-D sheet of Paper or Universe) immersed in an infinite Fourth Dimension. It is clear that one could stack Universes one over the other and jump from page to page... Maybe we could do that just by concentrating in front of a mirror as we did in the early science fiction...:)

The fact is that Science has been detached from reality. Papers oftentimes start with a given metric from nowhere to be used in the construction of geodesic using a Lagrangian from nowhere... There are no physical considerations... Of course, the complexity of the math makes it difficult to see the implicit hypotheses. I believe Wesson was very close to propose a hyperspherical shock wave Universe, he should have. But there is a dogma that precludes matter to travel at the speed of light and the questions or reasoning displayed prior in this blog were never asked or proposed.

Many people, including myself when I was 12 years old, considered that the Universe could be somehow traveling at the speed of light in some way. I believe that was a half-thought, that is, it did not have a reason of being, didn't answer or asked the pertinent questions (what happens when mass disappears from this Universe - that would lead to a suitable explanation for the famous E=mc^2 equation and to a genuine insight). I had that half-thought at early age and did not try to defend it to anybody because it did not pass my own scrutiny on why, how, what are the consequences, what is the topology etc...

Just to clarify, the Dogma is alright in traveling within the 3-Dimensional LightSpeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe or Shell. Motion within our simple 3-D Universe is governed by interaction among dilators and dilatons and cannot ever go above c. This should be seem as a lateral motion while Universe progresses onward (radially outwards) at the speed of light and thus it is just a change in direction or the original radial velocity vector. The amplitude of this velocity vector can never be changed since it is the speed of dilaton (spacetime wave) propagation.

There are implicit hypotheses in this theory which might not have been fully declared or perceived. I consider that the ones I brought forth are worthwhile to think about. I will try to bring the others about as I blog my theory into existence...:)

Cheers,

MP

The Cosmic Microwave Background

The Cosmic Microwave Background




Anisotropic Universe is what I would expect from a 3-D Big Bang or from any other Big Bang Model with which I am familiar.

What does Anisotropy means? Well, if you look into the sky we should be seen a hole (lack of galaxies) in a given direction and that would be where the Big Bang should had occurred.

I am not familiar with Inflation and other schemes to make the Universe Uniform but I felt bothered by that Uniformity. Einstein hoped, as many others, for a Static Universe that has always being here and forever will be. He even included the Cosmological Constant to make the Universe static, non-expanding nor imploding. It hurts one's feeling to see everything go up in smoke.... :)

The Microwave Cosmic Background has been proposed to be the remnants of the Big Bang. It bothered me that the thing is called Background and presents no or little anisotropy. Why it bothers me? It bothers because it would indicate that there was some thermalization of the radiation followed by an adiabatic expansion of the Universe. Thermalization means that radiation has to bounce back and forth within reflective boundary (or non-absorbing) conditions. I have a hard time finding how one creates those conditions in the early Universe. Let's say that the thermalization occurred while the Universe was small and opaque. As soon as it becomes transparent light will fly away at the speed of light leaving matter behind and thus escaping any further thermalization. I cannot see how one could cool down the original radiation into a Black Body radiation that is 2 or 3 Kelvin degrees cold.

Forget about the fact that the background is called a background because it is the same in any direction...:) This is absolutely insane and would indicate that the original radiation is being diffused back by the scarcely populated Universe that somehow found itself ahead of the original radiation... It doesn't make any sense to me.... By the way, I know how to make a Black Body...

HU Theory proposes that the Big Bang occurred in each and every poing of the Universe at the same time. This is an obvious although may be not self-evident result of the topology of the Hyperspherical Explosion. This means that from each and every point, energy and matter would flow away. The Big Bang Occurred in All Places At The Same Time.....

Radiation created at that time from a point one radian away from you, would arrive now and it would be Doppler shifted and go through multiple scaterings in the dense and early Universe. Doppler shifting would explain quite well the microwave nature of the radiation seen today. The fact that microwave radiation emanating from one radian in any direction (homogeneity) would arrive today (or any day) perfectly Homogeneity and Lack of Anisotropy...HU is intellectually gratifying.

Universe as a Higher Dimension Shock Wave

Universe as a Higher Dimension Shock Wave

Many people might have a knee-jerk reaction to the premises of the HyperGeometrical Universe Theory of Everything (HU for simplicity)...

There are undoubtedly new ideas which are tough to digest. We are all used to think the same thoughts and new concepts are supposed to receive higher scrutiny. I will try to clarify some of the most likely contentious points of the theory:

1. The first that comes to mind is the iconoclastic idea that we are traveling at the speed of light from the focal point of a four-dimensional space (or five dimensional spacetime) Big Bang.

The Big Bang has been proposed to be the result of a four-dimensional Big Bang in the past. Li and Wesson proposed this in his paper "The Big Bang as a higher-dimensional shock wave". In this paper the three dimensional Universe is presented as a hypersurface immersed on the fifth dimension. Solution for Einstein field equations without sources are provided including Wave-Like solutions of RAB=0. The topology is a one of a matter filed thus curved 3-D space in a flat 4-dimensional space. This means that the curvature is mass derived and the Universe resembles more an sphere inside a swimming pool. The Big Bang shock wave can be thought as 3-D shock wave crossing a page-like (flat) Universe. The crossing of the shock-wave creates what I consider an unpalatable anisotropy. Just a matter of taste.

In my theory, the shock wave creates not a flat Universe curved by its mass, but a 3-D shell-like expanding at the speed of light. It is difficult to be precise when speaking about curvature along a dimension we are not used to think about. I will only mention that there might be differences when I speak of curvature and when Relativity speaks of curvature. The other point is that the 3-D shell is defined based on the figure above, that is, X, Y and Z are perfect circles. As we travel around the Universe, we are always in the hyperspherical shock wave and if it were possible to propel oneself at speeds higher than the speed of light we would be able to go around the Universe. In fact, we would be able to get out of the Universe into the Void.

One might ask why the speed of light? The answer is simple and based on the following points:

1. Black Holes are considered to be very curved spacetime created by accretion of mass.
2. If we fall in a Black Hole we will be one with it, thus we will be a deformation of spacetime.
3. If item 2 is correct, we should be a deformation of spacetime since the beginning.
4. Light is due to alternate motion of matter (electrons), thus it should be a propagating deformation of spacetime.
5. Light propagates at the speed of light.
6. We are a non-constrained deformation of spacetime and thus we also should propagate at the speed of light.
7. If we are not traveling at the speed of light, that should mean that we are traveling perpendicularly to the directions we are able to see, thus we should be traveling perpendicular to our 3-D Universe.
8. The fact that we don't see anything from outside this Universe means that there shouldn't be any dilator (generator of spacetime oscillations) outside our 3-D shell.
9. The topology should be hyperspherical or whatever one would call this 4-dimensional object I proposed in my papers...:)
10. The space is naturally curved and has a radius of curvature equal to the dimensional age of the Universe (c * the age of the Universe).

It is important to notice that prior 4-Dimensional proposals of Big Bang as a Higher Dimensional Shock Wave missed the possibility that the Universe itself would be the shock wave.

Hypergeometrical Cosmology

HyperGeometrical Cosmology

The HyperGeometrical Universe theory is a simple Theory of Everything that based on clues from Relativity and Quantum Mechanics proposes that the Universe is actually an expanding shell on a light-speed expanding hyperspherical space disturbance. That shell where our Universe lies is a three dimensional hyperspherical shell that travels outwards at the speed of light.

Simple inspection of the above figure allows for many conclusions.

1. The first one is the Hubble expansion and why the Hubble constant is not a constant.
   
2. The Big Bang occurred in all points of the Universe at the same time. This explains why wherever you look, if you look far enough, you will see the beginning of the Universe.
   
3. In a three dimensional Big Bang a tremendous amount of anisotropy would ensue. One does not expect to find pieces of a bomb where the bomb exploded. Many "explanations" were proposed but as far as I can tell, they were not palatable.
   
4. The Four-Dimensional Big Bang is the only model that allows for a smooth microwave cosmic background. It is my believe that the background is actually the Doppler shifted gamma radiation from the early few seconds after the Universe was set in motion.
   
5. The reason for 2) is that at the time the Universe was set in motion (point of supersymmetry of the hyperforce), energy flew from each and every point of the early Universe. As the Universe expanded, energy that traveled the dimensional age of the Universe (circa 15 Billion Light years) will be reaching you by now no matter where you look.
   
6. There is a funny corollary: Everyone is the center of the Universe (at least of the three-dimensional shell where we live).
   
7. Newton proposed that a body under the influence of no force will travel in straight line with constant velocity. This model explains why it will continue moving and inspection of the figure above shows that is is never a straight line.
8. The HyperGeometrical Universe Theory shows that non-inertial motion takes place through the change in propagation vector. Two radial trajectories (outgoing along the Radial fourth-dimension or k-vector along the Radial direction) at positions separated by alpha radians (see figure above) will run away (Hubble expansion) from each other at speed alpha * c (velocity of light). If a body starts moving from Point A with speed alpha*c, it will continue moving until it reaches a point alpha radians from Point A (Point B). Reaching that Point B the body will simply move outwards while its Hubble speed from Point A will remain alpha*C. In this model , motion is due to a change in k-vector which has a dual equivalent as a local spacetime deformation. The motion from point A to point B relaxes spacetime and make it naturally curved again. This means that the HyperGeometrical Universe Theory provides the reason for free motion and complements Newton's Law...:)
   
9. Of course, inspection of the figure also indicates that opposing point in the Universe will travel apart at speed equal to Pi*C (greater than the speed of light). Of course, this is immaterial since it is impossible to cross more than a radian in any direction (at the speed of light through the duration of the Universe).
   
10. Two regions of the shell separated by one radian will run away from each other at the speed of light...
    
11. If you look into the sky at positions distant from you the dimensional age of the Universe, you will be looking at your very next neighboring point when the Universe was just a few millimeters wide.
    
12. In summary, the Universe has a radius of curvature equal to the dimensional age of the Universe, is finite and circular and cannot ever be traversed.
    
13. The answer to the Age Old question of what do we have after the end of the Universe is more Universe (you just cannot go there ever..:)
    
14. The Universe is in expansion and that doesn't depend upon the Universe mass content nor Dark Energy or anything slightly shadowy... This is an expanding four-dimensional Universe. Einstein could only see three dimensions and thus was concerned with the mass content of the Universe and the mass induced curvature. In this model, these kind of considerations might have a meaning locally.
15. The average curvature is defined by HyperGeometry (or Geometry)...
16. Please review the attached paper HyperGeometrical Universe - Cosmology and the original HyperGeometrical Universe -Grand Unification and feel free to ask any questions or to provide any comments.

HyperGeometrical Universe Topology

HyperGeometrical Universe

From the name of the theory one can conjure up that the Universe topology I am proposing is of a LightSpeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe, that is, the three dimensional Universe is located in a very thin space disturbance that propagates outwards (radially) at the speed of light in four-dimensional spatial Universe. The fifth dimension is the Cosmological Time.

Since the spacetime itself is a non-compact five dimensional manifold, there is a need for the three-dimensional spatial Universe, we are so used to, to be thin along the radial dimension.

The thinness is consistent with a localized event (Four-Dimensional Big Bang) that set the Universe in Motion fifteen billion years ago. A thin travelling shell is clearly the remnants of an above dimensional threshold event (Big Bang) that generated the Universe.

This is also consistent with the lack of aberration we see in our Universe. If the Universe were set in motion by a longer lived event, there would be aberration, which is difficult to visualize.

All forces we see are actually projections of the interactions that takes place in the five dimensional space. All forces including the ones associated with the most violent events in the Cosmos are just the result of interference patterns on a Four-Dimensional Hypersphere. In the papers contained in the Yahoo Groups site, you will find how using simple intereference patterns one can replicate Gravitation and Electromagnetism interactions.

That said, it is time to introduce X Particles This is actually a solitonic normal mode of space oscillations. The soliton aspect is mentioned to emphasize its traveling and localized nature. Different particles would correspond to different modes of oscillation and rotation of the X particles.

The fact that these are four-dimensional particles allow for three axis of revolution. The particle is a four-dimensional ellipsoid of revolution. Three axis of revolutions means also that spin, which is an intrinsic motion under current Science, becomes an extrinsic tumbling.

The axes of this ellipsoid of revolution maps to the quark content of a particle. Negative quark (down quark) is mapped to a negative phase (180 degrees out of phase with the oscillations of positive axes) in spacetime oscillations.

Now it should be clear that X particles are spacetime oscillators that thumble (spin <>0) while traveling at the speed of light with the rest of the Universe (also composed ot X particles) along the Radial direction. Particles with spin zero do not thumble and correspond to surface modes generators of the traveling hypersphere.

This theory revises the Standard Model with some interesting results, which will be review later, if there is interest.

Now let's investigate the first assumptions of the HyperGeometrical Universe Theory.

Are we actually traveling at the speed of light?

The most obvious indication that we are traveling at the speed of light is the famous Einstein Equation E=mc^2

Relativity states that the energy of a particle with rest mass m0 and momentum p is given by:

(A.1)

where m is the mass in motion.

This equation has implicit assumptions which can be brought into light by considering it a momentum conservation equation instead:

(A.2)

This is obviously the Pitagoras Equation for moments in two perpendicular directions adding into an hypothenusa aligned resulting momentum. The p momentum is our 3-dimensional linear momentum, while the m0C is the momentum perpendicular to our three dimensional space and it has a c-speed (the speed of light).

This indicates that we can consistently travel at the speed of light perpendicular to our three dimensional space and that will explain the E=mc2 energy.

Einstein did not realize the possibility of a hyperspherical expansion. Without that insight, the E=mc2 formula has no underlying reason for being.The energy has to be stored somehow, either as kinetic or potential energy and the storage mode has no connection to Relativity, that is, Relativity provide no guidance to how Nature store the famous nuclear energy. Without guidance, Science followed the potential energy paradigm, but missed the infinitely simpler and more elegant kinetic explanation. This theory tries to correct that misdirection.

This means that the nuclear energy is explained as being of kinetic nature and that precludes any potential energy stored in the form of strong or weak forces.

Needless to say, this is a great simplification and that is why it is a good idea to take one step back before moving forward in this area. In fact, the projection paradigm presently used, can be stretched further using the guidance of the hyperspherical topology, although that doesn't seem to be the best usage of it.

TIME THE FINAL FRONTIER

Talking about the meaning of time will require a Thought Experiment and that will address only what I called the PROXY OF TIME. c.t1 and c.t2 are proxies of time in the Lorentz transformation. They are proxies because they do not reflect time flow itself but are a artifact of multidimensional wave decomposition. I call them dimensional time in my papers.

Consider yourself as Being an Amoeba Stuck to the Surface of an Upwards Traveling Air Bubble (Traveling from the bottom of the sea to its surface) to understand it...:) ... You will also have to understand the concept of Proxy....

Remember that Chemical reactions will increase their rate as the temperature increases (in general, just go along and don't sweat the fine stuff). This means that the Amoeba will speed up as the temperature increase and temperature is increasing function of height from the bottom of the sea. This means that the PROXY OF TIME will speed up as it travels upwards.

Let's say that the Amoeba knows its biological clock (rate of replication) and can measure the passage of time by measuring how its colony grows.

This Amoeba, looking on a telescope, will see another bubble with other Amoebas and conjure up some theory of how time passes as you distances from each other (vertically). A very complex theory will be derived. The theory would be simple if the Amoeba knew it was traveling upwards and the temperature profile and the rate of acceleration of their biochemistry with temperature. Notice that chemistry is what controls their sense of time. In our case, velocity (local spacetime distortion) controls the speed of all forces, which in a Grand Unification Theory as this one, is just one.

Fortunately we have a simpler problem.

We are also dealing with relative speed, height and its influence on the PROXY OF TIME passage. Similarly to the Thought Experiment, there is a height (distance traveled by the HyperSpherical LightSpeed Expanding Universe) since the Big Bang (circa 15 Billion light years) and there is a relative measurement to be made. In the Amoeba case, it was the relative distance (PROXY OF TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE). In our case it is a relative imaginary angle difference.

Lorentz transforms are equivalent to a rotational in a four-dimensional space, but they can easily be understood as a rotation in a five dimensional space, where the new direction (dimension) reflects the existence of an absolute time and a Radial direction (c.t1). Any inertial reference frame corresponds to a rotational of an imaginary angle around the Cosmological Time Direction. Since we don't have any reference to be able to see what lies outside our thin Universe crust, we can't never see the Radial propagation or have an idea of where is this preferential direction pointing towards. We can measure only the angle difference between two bodies in this 3-dimensional crust. This means that we are in the same boat as the Amoebas Stuck Inside Raising Bubbles and can only measure relative time passage.

The other conclusion is that Lorentz transformation corresponds to a rotation by an imaginary angle between the reference frame and a Radial Direction and that any system in this Universe would be traveling at the speed of light radially.

This means that the cross section of the Expanding Hyperspherical Universe can be thought according to the figure below:

Figure 1. Shows the cross-section XTau for the expanding Universe. The Universe length along X is represented by the band. X (or Y or Z) is displayed along the perimeter of the circle. Also shown in the diagram is PSI (Cosmological Time) and Radial Time R.

It is clear that space is curved in this model and that the radius of curvature is the dimensional age of the Universe (age of the Universe times the speed of light).

From Wikipedia

Wikipedia description of a Lorentz transformation. It relates coordinates (x1,y1,z1,ct1) to (x2,y2,z2,ct2)

Notice that it corresponds to a rotation of an imaginary angle around a direction that is perperndicular to x2 and t2, not unlike a rotation around F the Cosmological Time coordinate.

Notice that the concept of time flow depends upon the angle between c.t1 and c.t2, which are represented by tau and tauPrime in the diagram.

Hypergeometrical Universe

The HyperGeometrical Universe

I finally decided to blog my theory into existence...

In this Blog, I will present the Theory of Everything which I aptly named The HyperGeometrical Universe.

For a deeper analysis, please visit the yahoo group site with the papers and FAQs. Here I will just explore the more interesting aspects of the theory.

The origin of the name is not the Hypergeometrical Function, but the fact that all elements of the Universe are described geometrically as solitonic states or deformation waves of a flexible five dimensional spacetime.

The added dimension in this space is non-compact and this new simple topology explains everything better that present compact topologies.

The theory is composed of four parts:
a) Grand Unification Theory
b) Cosmology
c) Cosmogenesis
d) HyperGeometrical Standard Model

Here I will present the first two parts and that will be enough to answer the following transcendental questions:
Q1. How was the Universe created ? -
This is answered by the Hypergeometrical Cosmogenesis Theory.
Q2. What lies outside the Universe?
Q3. What is the shape of the Universe
Q4. Why can’t one see the absolute past or the future?
Q5. Where did the Big Bang occur?
Q6. Why is the Universe so isotropic and homogeneous?
This is a late line of questioning originated from the measurements of the cosmic microwave background. The cosmic microwave background is considered to be the result of Big Bang and it is puzzling isotropic and uniform.
Q7. What is the origin of the Microwave Cosmic Background?
Q8. Why isn’t the Universe more like the result of any other three dimensional explosion?
Q9. Why is the Cosmological Constant so close to zero?
Q10. Can we travel at speeds higher than the speed of light? Are there objects moving at those speeds in the Universe?

I will also be happy to tell you What Time is and that Time is both ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE.

Time has always puzzled Mankind. Newton, Einstein and Mach (and others) have their interpretations of time.

You will have to go through a Thought (Gedanken) Experiment of Being an Amoeba Stuck to the Surface of an Upwards Traveling Air Bubble (Traveling from the bottom of the sea to its surface) to understand it...:) ... You will also have to understand the concept of Proxy....

The nuances will be a little toughter to understand but stick to it and it will be rewarding.
________________________________________
Now let's start....

Development in this area are currently driven by two forces:
a) group theoretical considerations and
b) the attachment to the prior formalism (e.g. Maxwell Equations in Kaluza-Klein Theory,etc.), that is, one would like to recover asymptotically those equations from whatever Theory of Everything one can concoct.

These two forces are really one. The group theoretical considerations are used to keep only topologies that are consistent with prior developments.

In summary, we are attached to form as opposed to content.

It turned out, that those are unnecessarily restrictive constraints. In my line of thought, I revised the whole formalism by keeping only the reasons behind it. This will become clearer in subsequent blogs.

This theory is a simple theory of everything, simple enough to be the framework where one can describe all known (known to me) physical phenomena (nuclear scattering, electromagnetism, radioactivity, gravitation) and it is complete (account properly for all the energy bits that are contained in matter).

From Wikipedia - The "Plato's Allegory of the Cave"

I will start this Blog with the description of the situation as I see it. The best description is given by the Allegory of the Cave direct from Wikipedia, and reproduced below:

Imagine prisoners who have been chained since childhood deep inside a cave. Not only are their limbs immobilized by the chains; their heads are chained as well so that their eyes are fixed on a wall.

Behind the prisoners is an enormous fire, and between the fire and the prisoners is a raised walkway, along which shapes of various animals, plants, and other things are carried. The shapes cast shadows on the wall, which occupy the prisoners' attention. When one of the shape-carriers speaks, an echo against the wall causes the prisoners to believe that the words come from the shadows.

The prisoners engage in what appears to us to be a game - naming the shapes as they come by. This, however, is the only reality that they know, even though they are seeing merely shadows of images. Suppose a prisoner is released and compelled to stand up and turn around. His eyes will be blinded by the firelight, and the shapes passing will appear less real than their shadows.

Similarly, if he is dragged up out of the cave into the sunlight, his eyes will be so blinded that he will not be able to see anything.

At first, he will be able to see darker shapes such as shadows and, only later, brighter and brighter objects.

The last object he would be able to see is the sun, which, in time, he would learn to see as that object which provides the seasons and the courses of the year, presides over all things in the visible region, and is in some way the cause of all these things that he has seen (The Republic bk. VII, 516b-c; trans. Paul Shorey).

This part of the allegory, incidentally, closely matches "Plato's metaphor of the sun" which occurs near the end of The Republic, Book VI.

Once enlightened, so to speak, the freed prisoner would no doubt want to return to the cave to free "his fellow bondsmen". The problem, however, lies in the other prisoners' not wanting to be freed: descending back into the cave would require that the freed prisoner's eyes adjust again, and for a time, he would be one of the identifying shapes on the wall. This would make his fellow prisoners murderous towards anyone who attempted to free them.

This is what I faced when I tried to publish this theory and this is the reason why I decided to have a broad review of my ideas in a public setting.

I will start building the framework of the theory next.

The W-Minus Particle

The W-Minus Particle

Last week I had the pleasure of sharing the company of a very bright young fellow from the D0 project during a trip from Brazil.

Of course, we know how they work. In the case they are caught, Fermilab will disavow any knowledge of their existence and they would have to take the cyanide pill – You know, one should keep appearances…J

We discussed many aspects of my theory while he grilled me and reached conclusions based upon the little knowledge I was able to impact during our brief conversation.

He proudly showed me that he worked on the measurement of W-Minus boson mass and that he is what physicists called a Theorist's Theorist (Theorist Squared), that is, the highest level of abstractionist possible while still being called a physicist…J some called them mathematicians behind their backs..:) ( I am one of those…J)

D0, which I will call Rafael as a homage to the Illuminati painter ..:) for sake of keeping the innocent safe, told me several things.

The Sistine Madonna, details of the angels (1513-1514) by Raphael

One of them is that they had just measured the mass of W-.

D0 (DeltaZero) mentioned that he did not see value in my theory bridging the gap between Classical and Quantum Mechanics and even mentioned that that bridge is a simple graduate school class exercise.

He failed to realize the meaning of the word Principle in Equivalence Principle. A Principle is proposed when there is no way to derive the result from a previous theory. It is the basis of the subsequent theory or logical framework – in this case Quantum Mechanics.

It is not correct to say that since particles have to be described by functions and functions can be described by Fourier transforms then p -> -ihbar Delta.

In saying that one is imposing the hidden hypothesis that particles have to be described by continuous functions as opposed to state variables (position, mass, momentum) which are just numbers. Of course I mentioned Rafael that Albert Einstein spent his whole life trying to figure out how to link Classical and Quantum Mechanics. That would normally be enough to establish that understanding how the classical view of the Universe and the quantum view of the Universe link together is relevant.

I also mentioned that the fifth dimension (R) and the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and the Fundamental Dilator Paradigm naturally introduce the spatial uncertainty and wave character to the dynamics of dilators.

D0 is just an outstanding graduate student but the failures of basic understanding are common to all practitioners in love with form while not paying enough attention to the underlying physics. Of course, theorist's theorists are to blame if one needs to name names…J

Of course, W- is the particle that "carries the Electroweak Force" and it is responsible for the Neutron decay etc.

Here we described Neutrons as well as any other particle as being coherences between deformational states of a 5-Dimensional Metric. Since many of the particles interact, they are described in terms of the Fundamental Dilator coherence, as a result of a simple Fourier integration consideration. All interacting particles should have non-zero interaction integral, that is, one cannot have non-correlated dilator coherences and have a non-zero interaction.

In addition to the standard spacetime (locally Lorentzian or Minkowiskian), there is a tremendously big extra dimension measured by its radius of curvature as the dimensionalized age of the Universe (lightspeed time the age of the Universe). The exact age of the Universe was calculated from the Pioneer anomaly discrepancy in another page of this blog.

Dr. Illuminati above shows two cross-sections in the place of his eyes. Those cross-sections are where our beloved 3D Universe is at..:) Where you read X, you could read Y or Z. For bodies without orbital angular momentum, there is a complete symmetry and X,Y and Z can freely rotate with respect to R (the radial direction). Angular moment breaks this symmetry. Later I will explain how to solve all our energy problems and interstellar travel problems using this little bit of information…J My bright D0 (DZero) fellow should be able to understand this obscure statement... Well, perhaps not, since it doesn't come as a symmetry but instead as a breakdown of symmetry…J (Don't try to use Noether theorem here..)…

I've been very critical of theorist's theorists since they cannot understand the value of physical insight. That said, I certainly value their abstraction capabilities. In my time, we used to propagate Green's functions by hand… now-a-days the same equations are propagated by Mathematica, Matlab, R or Maple packages. This makes life easier, people more productive but also makes physics less visible. All of this doesn't make the people less brilliant, specially Rafael who is a brilliant person. As you know, a brilliant man or woman will reach the correct or wrong conclusion faster than a less intelligent person. The quality of the conclusion (right or wrong) depends on which hypotheses one chooses to begin one's reasoning…J

Well, if that is the case that will yield a very clear prediction within my theory.

My theory contains only four experimental parameters. One is the Planck constant which relates mass to wavelength projections onto the 3D hypersphere surface. The second is the speed of light. The other two are angles associated with the Electron-Proton and Positron-Electron transmutation notes.

There are other minor parameters (moment of inertia) which can be derived from first principles and geometry.

Let's review the neutron description:

This description shows the two red lines corresponding to the Electron-Proton transmutation notes.

This diagram leaves W- without a description. It just happens that before the electron and anti-neutrino appears a Boson (W-) has a brief existence. Of course, this is not a problem. Below is the channel containing the famous W- boson.

To understand what this means one has to look into the state description of the Neutron.

Heisenberg in 1932 stated that Protons and Neutrons were just degenerated states of the same "nuclear" potential or Gauge field. Of course, this hypothesis failed to meet the requirement of being geometric. It introduces willy-nilly another gauge field…J and doesn't make a simple model for charge. In my case, charge is just the relative phase of dilation of the dilator's coherence. Notice that the Proton and the Electron differs only by the phase of the initial state. The electron starts on the top state (electron state) and the proton starts from the bottom state (Proton states). Also notice that the two states associated with each particle is clearly defined. They differ just by orientation, that is, a transition between (2/3,2/3,-1/3) and (2/3,-1/3,2/3) corresponds to a 90 degrees rotation around the X-axis.

Of course, for someone to define a phase one has to define a Universal Clock. How can one have a Universal close and still be consistent with Strict Relativity. Again, look deep into the eyes of Dr. Illuminati and see that the local time tau and the local direction x are free to rotate (local deformation of the Fabric of Space) all the way to 45 degrees. The hyperbolic nature of our local time is due to the choice of equations of motion and how we describe force and mass – non-geometric concepts. In my theory, dynamics is ruled by the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and interaction has no poles…J thus no infinities, renormalization/regularization etc…

These are dynamic differences despite of the fact that they are represented similarly to energy differences. I had to create this splitting because it takes time to rotate and during that time the dilator continues spinning within the 4D spatial manifold while propagating at the speed of light along the radial direction. Sub-coherences between these states correspond to rotations within the 3D space and change the phase relationship between tunneling and spinning. This shifts which phase will be flush with the 3D lightspeed expanding hypersphere. Only phases overlapping the 3D Universe at the appropriate phases interact or exist. I used "I interact therefore I exist" paradigm.

In the W-Minus coherence, it is clear that the electron coherence is flanked with two electron-proton transmutation notes. Those notes have the effect of rotating the local metric deformation within the 3D hypersurface thus introducing a dephasing between spinning and tunneling. If you are spinning perpendicularly to R and X, after two 3D rotations you would be rotating around R and –X, thus alternating spinning direction at each de Broglie step. This means that the W- would behave as a BOSON, that is, it has zero effective spin.

There is nothing special about being a boson or not. Certainly there isn't anything about carrying a FORCE be it strong or weak. The mismatch in period introduced by the red lines (Proton-Electron transmutation subcoherences) results in the finite neutron lifetime. Different particles have different period mismatches and thus different bandwidths. This mismatch is what induces the local deformation of the fabric of space and thus the exiting speed.

I noticed that D0 failed to keep his editorial prerogative. Rafael mentioned that since he was not convinced with my arguments (limited by my care of not upsetting my judge and by good manners) he would not redirect others to my blog. The fact that he mentioned it to other members of the D0 group is that Batavia, Illinois (Fermilab) has been among my latest readers. They read it before, but I am giving Rafael the benefit and considering that he was able to see beyond the simplicity of my theory the strength of my ideas.

Of course, Quantum Chromodynamics has predictions which are accurate. This only means that it should reduce to my theory if one makes the appropriate assumptions.

One that should be evident from reading the about my Quantum Lagrangian Principle is that the wavefunction present in all quantum mechanics equations corresponds to the metric deformation projected onto the 3D hypersphere. Gauge invariance just means that the Quantum Lagrangian Principle should be independent upon the initial state of the Fabric of Space.

In my theory, the Universe is criss-crossed by a dilaton field with a wavelength equal to the Compton wavelength of a Hydrogen atom (Fundamental Dilator). This very fine grid is not detectable because of the Quantum Lagrangian Principle. It states that at each de Broglie step of the Lighspeed Expanding Universe all particles dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field, thus it produces no scattering whatsoever.

Despite of that unsatisfying conclusion, the physical hypothesis (The Quantum Lagrangian Principle) is trivial to understand and from it one can easily reach the no scattering conclusion.

I mentioned Rafael about the zero amplitude dilator and its realization by the grains of sand on a drum. A zero amplitude dilator would always move to the nodes of the drum's normal modes. If one substitute those zero amplitude dilators by unit amplitude dilators, they would all move into the normal modes' peaks. Out of phase dilators would move out of the surface (out of our 3D Universe) and never come back. Since we don't see a dilaton field emanating from these out of our Universe, one should conclude that all dilators were created in phase or where phased at the beginning of times…J

Please feel free to ask questions.

Cheers,

MP

PS- I tried to cover a lot of my theory in this blog as a brief review of the theory for newcoming DZero theorists. Details can be found in the PDF links on the blog margins.

I will later ellaborate on some requests Rafael made which he deemed necessary for my theory to be considered by the academia. One of the requests is to obtain Dirac Action for the electron.

Upon that request, I provided an Action for the dilator. I mentioned that Nabla of the dilaton field equal to zero defines the condition for the dilator and dilaton field to be in phase and thus defines the equations of motion for the dilators.

He looked puzzled for sometime. I supposed he realized that that condition is equal to the covariant matter-free Action if one replaces Nabla by a covariant derivative, square the resulting vector and integrate the result through space. Of course, that has to be the case. The Lagrangian Principle estipulates that dilator always dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field, thus not interfering with the dilator field. This means that whatever controls the dilaton field also controls the dynamics of the dilators. In fact, reality is slightly more complicated than that but I will leave at this at this time.

Equating the Nabla of the dilaton field to zero (or covariant derivative of the dilaton field to zero) at the de Broglie steps of the lightspeed expansion of the 3D Hyperspherical Universe actually yields an equation of motion. Time is quantized since the Lagrangian is applied only when there is interaction - specific phases of the dilator spinning.

Recently, Dudley Herschbach published a paper entitled "Simple and surprisingly accurate approach to the chemical bond obtained from Dimensional Scaling". In this paper, he calculated the bond energy of the ground and many excited states using an specific style of dimensional scaling. In his paper, the effect of using a large-D (dimesionality) for the classical H2 equations of motion is to keep the dihedral angle quantum while reducing all the other parameters into classical variables. This is what one would expect from making the electron dilators to move into the positive interference patterns (Lissajous) on a molecule with cylindrical symmetry.

Of course, these interference patterns become increasingly more complex as one considers more complex molecules. The simple solution is just to use Schrodinger equation given that I already identified the wavefunction with the dilaton field emanating from the electron dilators.

The Hypergeometrical Y(4140) and Particle J

The Hypergeometrical Y(4140) and Particle J

In the past, I joked about being part of the Illuminati association. I rarely read fiction but I enjoyed reading "Angels and Demons" by Dan Brown.

It helped that it was about scientists and that I had just come back from Castello di Sant'Angelo and the Vatican.

My allusions to the Illuminati have less to do with their anti-religious nature and more with their Illuminating aspects.

The Illuminati were supposed to be formed by scientists – people who could see Nature for what it is; without dogmas and preconceived ideas.

If you read this blog you might be an Illuminati in that sense – someone with enough of an open mind that can envision a world without the dogmatic Standard Model.

Remember that the Standard model makes very precise predictions and so does Nostradamus (in retrospect and after one uses pattern recognition to associate whatever happened with whatever was written in his books)..:)

There is no reason to believe that only the Standard Model can be an extremely precise logical framework to describe Nature. In fact, in the bowels of the FermiLab, a new and strange particle was created – not predicted by the Standard Model. This particle was named Y(4140).

The table below contains all the hyperons I described within my theory. There might be more of them but if they were not in this table I didn't describe them.

A notable exception is particle J. In my teenage years I came across it when its discovery by Dr. Ting was announced. At that time, I thought that that particle would convey the force that limited the speed of bodies to the speed of light. Of course, I was wrong. It is now a pleasure to describe it in this blog.

Please click this link for better pictures.

Particle	Symbol	Rest Mass (Mev/c2)	Decay Reaction	Spin	Coherence Lifetime
NeutrinoElectron	e	0.0000022		1/2
NeutrinoMuon		0.17		1/2
NeutrinoTau		15.5		1/2
KaonMinus		493.7		1/2
KaonPlus		493.7	+ + 	1/2
KaonPlus		493.7	π+ + π0	1/2
KaonZeroShort	K0S	497.7	π0+ π0	1/2
KaonZeroLong	K0L	497.7	π+ + e- +e	1/2
MuonMinus		105.7	e- - e + 	1/2
MuonPlus		105.7	e+ + e - 	1/2
Electron	e-	0.510998918	e-	1/2	Stable
PionMinus	π-	139.57018	e- + e	1/2
PionPlus	π+	139.57018	e+ -e	1/2
PionZero	πo	134.9766	e++ e- + hw	1/2
Proton	P	938.3	Unobserved	1/2	Stable[1]
Neutron	N	939.6	p + e- - νe	1/2	885.7±0.8[2]
DeltaPlusPlus	Δ++	1232	π+ + p	3/2	6×10-24
DeltaPlus	Δ+	1232	π+ + n	3/2	6×10-24
DeltaPlus	Δ+	1232	π0 + p	3/2	6×10-24
DeltaZero	Δ0	1232	π0 + n	3/2	6×10-24
DeltaZero	Δ0	1232	π- + p	3/2	6×10-24
DeltaMinus	Δ-	1232	π- + n	3/2	6×10-24
LambdaZero	Λ0	1115.7	π- + p	1/2	2.60×10-10
LambdaZero	Λ0	1115.7	πo + n	1/2	2.60×10-10
SigmaPlus	Σ+	1189.4	π0 + p	1/2	0.8×10-10
SigmaPlus	Σ+	1189.4	π+ + n	1/2	0.8×10-10
SigmaZero	Σ0	1192.5	Λ0 + γ	1/2	6×10-20
SigmaMinus	Σ-	1197.4	π- + n	1/2	1.5×10-10
Xi Zero	Ξ0	1315	Λ0 + π0	1/2	2.9×10-10
Xi Minus	Ξ-	1321	Λ0 + π-	1/2	1.6×10-10
OmegaMinus	Ω-	1672	Λ0 + K-	3/2	0.82×10-10
OmegaMinus	Ω-	1672	Ξ0 + π-	3/2	0.82×10-10

This is particle Y(4140) decaying process:

As I mentioned in my prior blog, the Hypergeometrical Universe theory has no problem describing its nature.

The mass prediction will be left to another blog. It is a simple problem.

Let's reconstruct particle Y from its components. First let's see where muons come from and how are they described here.

Let consider the decaying of Kaon Plus (Minus) resulting in an positron and a Muon Plus (electron and a Muon Minus).

First let's consider the long hand representation of Kaon Plus. It decays into a Pion Zero and a Pion Plus.

Similarly, Kaon Minus decays into Pion Zero and a Pion Minus. Remember that Pion Zero is a Majorana Particle.

The secondary decay channels are:

KaonPlus -> MuonPlus + MuonNeutrino

and

KaonMinus -> MuonMinus +MuonAntiNeutrino

Below we have an irreducible representation of Kaon Minus and Plus. Notice that the number of transmutation lines is kept as well as their respective charges.

Each horizontally written Ball can represent a four note dimensional chord or a single state in the state representation of the particle in the short-hand notation.

The difference between both states is just the length of the coherence, not the particle observable characteristics (charge or mass).

The KaonMinus -> MuonMinus +MuonAntiNeutrino decay is shown below:

A secondary undistinguishable channel is shown below:

The KaonPlus -> MuonPlus + MuonNeutrino decay is just changing red by green and electron by positron, and antiProton by Proton etc.

The Neutrino Tau is the last Neutrino to be considered and it is basically the same thing as the irreducible representation of the Kaon. Neutrino Tau also decays into a MuonPlus plus a MuonNeutrino...

Now we are ready to express Particle J within the Hypergeometrical Standard Model. Particle J is formed of Muon Plus and Muon Minus, thus its Balls Diagrams looks like this:

Any Illuminati will readily realize that Particle J is the Illuminati Diamond..:)

Now that we know how to represent the Particle J one is left with the simple problem of creating the Particle f out of two Kaons (Plus + Minus).

This is a simple problem.

Below is the Particle f components:

Resulting in :

Now we are ready to finalize Particle Y(4140):

Where the blue and red lines are the transmutation dimensional chords mentioned in the beginning of the Hypergeometrical Standard Model.

One less mystery in this Great Universe of Ours.

Cheers,

MP

PS- By the way, the Science is easy. Difficult is to publish it at Blogger..:)

For better pictures, visit my other blog

http://www.hypergeometricaluniverse.com

or the PDF Y4140

The Meson B can be easily recovered with the information I provided in this blog.  If nobody can do it within a week I will do it next weekend..>:)

Please, feel free to ask questions.  

New Particle Baffles Scientists...:)

New Particle Baffles Scientists...:)

A new particle Y(4140)is baffling Science, more specifically Quantum Chromodynamics and the Standard Model. It should be no surprise that that particle is perfectly explained within the framework of the Hypergeometrical Universe.

This is the Wikipedia entry where I get most of my information...:)

Because it decays into J/ψ and φ mesons, it has been suggested that this particle is composed of a charm quark and charm antiquark.

The missing rest mass from the decay is only about 27.0 ± 2.9 ± 1.2 MeV/c2.

I already provided the the Hypergeometrical Standard Model representation for the decaying products of this particle and it shouldn't be difficult for a reader to figure out what is the structure of particle Y(4140).

I will give the answer this weekend when I have more time to dedicate to the Hypergeometrical Universe.

Cheers,

MP

How to subscribe to the Hypergeometrical Universe

How to subscribe to the Hypergeometrical Universe

This was a puzzling question. I think I figured out how to burn my feed in the FeedBurner, but then they told me to relocate those feeds into Google again.

Please try it and let me know if it works. There is a link to Subscribe to right on the right panel of the blog...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- I've been awfully busy and haven't been able to blog the theory. Despite of that, whenever someone asks a question, I always manage to make time and provide a brief answer. Please, feel free to ask questions.

The Silence of the Lambs

The Silence of The Lambs..:)

This blog is about to reach its 30,000 unique IP readers...:) Hurray!!!!

I didn't know there were so many cosmologists, string theorists, particle physicists in the planet...:)

There are many reasons to celebrate...

The theory has been published in two books:

• Quantization in Astrophysics - containing the Grand Unification and New Cosmology Paradigm
• Hadron Physics New Energy Issues - Containing the Hypergeometrical Standard Model

not that bad for something created in the everyday commuting to work (on a shaking NYC subway..>:)

and reached the following crowning achievements...:)

1. I demonstrated that the theory provides the appropriate solutions to the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion and the Gravitational Lensing problems.
2. In the Gravitional Lensing blog, I showed how a simple reasoning about the usage of Gerber's potential could be used to show that Gerber's potential (Hypergeometrical Potential) could predict the correct Gravitational light deflection.  Somehow that simple reasoning was beyond the specialists of the time and since then. Einstein, very cunningly, placed the responsibility for the demise of Gerber's ideas in the hands of the specialists at the time.  Something like, I wash my hands..:)
3. I provided the solution to the Pioneer Anomaly in which I clarify the meaning of Hubble equation and the topology of looking into the past...:)
4. I provided a full description of all particles (hyperon family and isotopes).
5. I corrected Newton's equations by eliminating all non-geometrical elements of Classical Mechanics.
6. I kept the theory relativistic despite of introducing Absolute Time and a Preferential Frame of Reference or at least a preferential direction of reference (R).
7. Somehow, it seems that I introduced a geometrical interpretation of Lorentz transforms of all things... I did not hear any angry relativistic cosmologists telling me otherwise...which is a surprise... I thought everyone knew that Lorentz transform is a rotation by an imaginary angle...
8. I introduced a new model for matter... the first non-obvious model. Up to know things were waves, particles or particle-waves...:) The dilator is a wavegenerator that flows like a wave...:)
9. The Humble Fundamental Dilator shows how a proton and an electron are the same entity and have the same 4D Mass, thus simplifying tremendously the understanding and unification of the Universe.
10. The Humble Fundamental Dilator is also the hidden variable Einstein tried throoughout his whole life to find. The entity that creates Quantum Mechanics.
11. I challenged the concept of Field and showed that implicit in it is the existence of a Cosmological Coherence (all dilators in the Universe dilate in synch with their local dilaton fields). Synchronization is evident using absolute time (in the RXYZ frame).
    
    
12. I Grand Unified all the Forces (Gravitation and Electromagnetism) while providing a replacement for the Gluon-Quark paradigm (the dilator itself) and for the Electroweak force (the advent of nonlinear hadronics)...
13. In replacing the Gluon-Quark paradigm I modified the symmetry requirements for a Grand Unification or Supersymmetry Theory. The pesky Reciprocal Symmetry is eliminated and with that the need that everything very slow to have the same energy as everything very fast...:) This is an outrageous symmetry... Physicist should be kissing my ring for eliminating such nasty constraint....:)
14. I proposed the solution for all energy problems in the shape of fusion reactors while produce fusion (or fission) products along a single direction (or cone)...:) Energy is readily extracted through magneto-hydrodynamics means... Charged products make up powerful currents to be slowed down by reversed accelerators...:)
15. I proposed a new topology for the Cosmos...:) which eliminates the need for Einstein Cosmological Constant, dark energy, inflation... This at a time when inflationary people are adjusting their parameters to explain the whole chimichanga...:) Very unfortunate...:) At least at this time, I would love to say Ockham's Razor... People have already readied their acceptance speeches for the Nobel Ceremony...:) Horrible situation...:)
16. In creating this new topology, I explained why the speed of light is the limiting speed in our Fabric of Space..(3D Universe)...
17. I acknowledged that in fact things can move faster than the speed of light by traveling (surfing) along an interference pattern...:) This might be someday used to create superluminal traveling when people learn how to pattern dilaton fields...:) or die waiting to ride a Tachyon driven spacecraft...:)
18. I provided the equations to Cosmological Constants (vacuum permittivity and magnetic susceptibility).
19. I also showed that the Gravitational Constant is not constant and scaled down with the inverse of the age of the Universe....:) Earlier times had stronger Gravitational fields..>:)
20. The Gravitational "constant" dependence provides the blueprint for the demise of the Universe...:) The relaxation of the dilators... A totally new Cosmogony..>:)
21. I provided an alternative explanation for the Action-At-Distance paradox which bothered Einstein so much and that is the basis for a total delusional state of mind where people throw their hands up and accept anything..:) from time travel to time traveling backwards in Black Holes ... to Black Holes...:)
22. I also provided an alternative explanation for the Double Slit Experiment. In my theory, dilators (electron included) travel on a four dimensional space at the center of a horospherical reference frame. The waves it creates are the same it surfs, that is, the electron surfs a four-dimensional wave (dilaton field) and by simple projection, it also surfs the 3D projection (de Broglie waves). This means that the de Broglie wave is not a matter wave. Instead, it is a metric deformation wave created by the dilator. The much larger wavelength is due to the way things are projected in an hyperbolic space... The electron in the two slit experiment will travel through a single slit while its dilaton field projection will travel through both...:) On the other side of the barrier, the electron will continue to surf the interferometric dilaton fields and thus will deposit itself on an interferometric pattern onto the detector..:) Very simple and again I would love to say, Ockham's Razor... despite my qualms about its usage...:)
23. I provided a simple multi-coherence (dilator dimensional chords) description for each and every hyperon and isotope (isotopes are trivial since they only have protons and neutrons)...: )
24. I provided an alternative solution to the mass paradigm by assigning it to an overlapping 4D volume (dilator overlapping with the fabric of space at specific phases of the dilator spinning).
25. I created an extrinsic representation for the Spin.... that obscure quantity that bothered so many quantum physics students for so long...:) and explained What the Hell is the meaning of 1/2 ... as you might know rotation description does not include any quadratic potential and thus there isn't any zero point rotation....:) It was always a bothering 1/2 to me...:)
26. In making Spin extrinsic, I introduced the delightful Girlfriend on a Swing Gedanken Experiment to show how time could be Pseudo-Quantized..>:)
    
27. I corrected all Newton's equations (Four of them) and provided the really relativistic Biot-Savart law. That law can be used to project better Tokamaks if that is the way one wants to proceed.
28. Einstein also got his share...:) In creating an Absolute Time and explaining the meaning of inertia, I rebutted Mach's principle of nonlocal interaction and restored Newton's Absolute Time..>:) which times the existence of the Universe as opposed to our short existence...:)
    
29. I did all this by looking into what people did right and throwing away without fear what people did wrong...:) That was easy since I don't have to write this as a grant to my reactionary peers..:)
30. Most of all, I told you that the most important outlet for Physics - The Cornell-Los Alamos E-Print Repository should be in the hands of someone more capable than Paul Ginsparg. It is a shame Science can be silenced by arbitrary actions of a single person...:)

I also pleaded for my Lambs not to remain silent and to speak up their minds. I value criticism and would be happy to post any one of your meaningful comments. I know that in those thirty thousand readers many are scientists (professional scientists).

What I expect from them is either a statement telling me that I made a mistake here or there or some active action against the barriers that precluded a more wider distribution of this theory, namely, to request, demand that my theory receives a 1 megabyte space on the Cornell-Los Alamos E-Print Repository hard drive..:) NOT TOO MUCH TO ASK...:)

I've fulfilled all the requirements to post the theory there... (already peer-reviewed, published work that has been endorsed)...:)

Double-click the Bird below to find out more..>:)

I would welcome anyone to take the initiative to publish my paper on the Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives. :)

The pdf is here. This is a shorter version of the theory. Just below 1 megabyte length. It was accepted and endorsed the last time I attempted posting it there.

As I mentioned, I would be eternally grateful to anyone (My Giordano Bruno) that would bring this work to a wider audience through posting it at the Arxives or through forwarding this blog link or the pdfs to other people...

Considering that this theory provides a new paradigm for Coherent Nuclear Fusion, the planet you might save might be yours...:)

Feynman wouldn't blink in face of this challenge...:)

The current version of the work is here.

I know that if you do so, Paul Ginsparg might place you on his blacklist. I know that I am not a professional scientist any longer..:) I know it all....

I also know the VALUE OF IDEAS and that they are worth fighting for. I don't expect any thing less from a scientist (professional or not)...

Just think, "What would Richard P. Feynman do????"

Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars - mere globs of gas atoms. I, too, can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more? Richard P. Feynman

Don't make me explain analogies:

• Poets - String Theorist, Supersymmetrists...Gauge Physicists...:)
• the Beauty of the Stars - The Beauty of Weyl Fermions, Higgs, Bosons, Dirac Matrices, etc...
• Mere globs of gas atoms - My humble and simple theory
• Feynman - The little me...

Cheers,

MP

PS- Since the first release of this blog, I had the opportunity to discuss my theory with Craig Markwardt from JPL.  I will present the discussion in its interity soon.

I wonder if my friends from the Laser Laboratory at UofR or at the Fermi Lab are reading the changes in paradigm for nuclear fusion....:) I once told Professor Huizenga while attending a party at his house, that I knew how to make a Gamma Ray laser... He looked very surprised and most likely somewhat amused..>:)

I am sure that in his mind briefly passed those concerns about the problems pumping an ultrafast decaying nuclear transition, etc... As usual, people can only think within the paradigms they lived by...I wasn't able to create any interest in that brief interaction...:)

I told the same thing to Gary Holton many years ago... Life is full of hits and misses...As usual , I would love to hear from my friends at UPenn, Princeton, Berkeley, UofChicago..>:) CERN, Steven Hawking comes to mind, the 5Dimension Centre, USAF, Whiteman Airforce Base, The Institute for Advanced Studies, well, the Devil Himself (I mean, Paul Ginsparg).....>:)

Energy Conservation and the Fundamental Dilator

Energy Conservation 

and 

the Fundamental Dilator

David Freiberg has left a new comment on your post "The Hypergeometrical Force":

Wait, wait, wait. How does a proton, with hundreds of times more mass than an electron, turn into an electron? Does the Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy still apply? If so, where does all the energy go when it does this go and where does the energy come from to add the mass? 

David was kind to ask how energy conservation resists such an outrageous transformation as proposed in the Fundamental Dilator paradigm.

The answer has to contain the circumstances where these transformations take place and the emphasis on the fact that the Fundamental Dilator replaces the construct particle.  The replacement of a particle by a coherence between deformation states of a 4D spatial metric (5D spacetime metric) is basic for the understanding of this paradigm.

Currently David thinks about particles (electron, proton..) as having mass, charge - fundamental properties assigned for the life of the particle...:)  Of course, the Fundamental Dilator makes these properties transients associated with states of a coherence.  The only way this would be consistent with observation would be if we were always observing a single face (state) of this coherence.

That is exactly the case. To achieve that one has to remember that the coherence (tunneling between deformation states) is accompanied by spinning within the 4D spatial manifold where the lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave Universe (our 3D Universe) exists.

The Ball Diagram shown above displays the not only the transformation (tunneling between deformation states) but also the orientation change (with respect to our 3D Universe) as the dilator goes about his life.

The initial state is the one that is in phase with the 3D Shockwave Universe. Due to the very, very small dimension along one of the directions (R), as the spinning takes place, the overlap between our dilator displacement volume and the 3D Universe vanishes.  Only at "quantized" phases of spinning is that there is overlap. ONLY at "quantized" phases there is interaction.

This stroboscopic nature and the 4D topology are the source of Quantum Mechanics.

This diagram shows two electrons belonging to a Cooper Pair.  As you can see, despite of the non-static nature of the dilator, their interaction when the dilator is flush with the 3D shockwave universe, is always consistent with what David considers their nature to be, that is, an electron always repels another electron.

The sideways phases have little overlap with our 3D Universe due to the initial symmetry of the problem and the symmetry of the involved states.

Notice that due to the coherent form in which these changes take place, the dilaton field is generated coherently, that is, the dilaton phases are always in phase with the propagating metric disturbances (dilatons) since they travel at the same speed (the speed of light).  As an aside, only in the case of Cooper pairs, the the intermediate phases anihilate each other's contributions, reducing their interaction to an Anti-Gravitational strength!!!

The Energy conservation is related to the size (3D volume overlap) of this footprint.  Local deformations of the Fabric of Space (local tilts) would impact into the dilator Kinetic Energy or Potential Kinetic Energy (Strong Force). Depending upon what is the choice for the laws of motion (Newton's Laws or my Quantum Lagrangian Principle) mass will behave in a hyperbolic manner (e.g. Lorentz Transform or Strict Relativity - hyperbolic cosines projections) or in a linear manner (through cosine projections).

There is a principle of 4D displacement volume conservation which is applied to the whole Universe, yielding ZERO, that is, the total displacement volume of all dilators in the Universe is ZERO.

The 3D projection of this law is our energy-momentum conservation law.

Please feel free to ask questions.

Cheers,

MP

The Hypergeometrical Force

The Hypergeometrical Force

When I DERIVED the equation for the Hypergeometrical Force – the Grand Unification Force - used a setup with two infinitesimal elements of current (or mass flow).

These infinitesimal elements of current or flow defined a direction within the four dimensional spatial manifold. This direction is shown as velocities in the formulas.  Despite of having velocities, these formulas were derived for constant velocities, where the velocities were referred from a relaxed Fabric of Space reference system.  To eliminate this constraint one has to derived the potential through adiabatic integration followed by the derivation of a generalized force according to Lagrangian formalism!!!

These means that the force equations below are constant velocity forces. Despite of this constraint, they are quite usefull for making simplied reasonings about dynamics.

Here are the equations for Electromagnetism and Gravitation:

(1)

Where C1 and C2 are the charges traveling at V1 and V2 and c is the speed of light. R12 is a vector from charge 1 to charge 2.

Similarly for Gravitation:



Notice that the only difference is the proportionality coefficient. This means that the interaction is the same – dilaton field-dilator interaction controlled by the Quantum Lagrangian Principle. The proportionality coefficient ratio is given by the ratio of these two angles a₀ and a₁:


R0 is the age of the Universe times the speed of light (15.82 billion light years) and λ1 is the Compton wavelength of a Hydrogen atom. To be precise, this ratio has to be multiplied by an elastic coefficient of the Fabric of Space. This coefficient is the reason why dilaton and Gravitational waves exist.

The humongous (10³⁶) factor is easy to understand by this simple figure. A more detailed analysis can be found in the pdf containing the theory.

This equation can be simplified for the case where there is no rotation and one of the bodies is much larger than the other (Sun and Mercury for instance) into:


This is the first time a force is actually derived from a purely geometrical theory of the Universe, so it took me some time to understand that this equation has to be integrated upon R (distance) to yield the amount of energy that can be shared into Kinetic and Potential at any position.

Adiabatic integration upon R yields the potential

(3)

This potential is the one used in the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion problem. Applying it to Lagrangian Formalism yields the more appropriate force formula for physical bodies or charges:

Similarly for F one obtains:





Thus F becomes:

Expanding it in powers of



Neglecting terms above the second order


This means that my Gravitational Force does not contains first order dependence upon v/c and also that it perfectly describes all celestial dynamics. It produces the same formula for the Precession of Mercury or Earth or anything else Perihelion…J


In summary, my formula produces not one but TWO formulas for force. One for constructs that cannot change speed (e.g. Light) and another for bodies. They are reproduced without approximations below:


The second formula is used to derive the Gravitational Lensinng (Gerber failed to do so since he only ansatz (guessed) right the first formula).

The more complex formulation for the Force per unit mass (for double jets Black Holes or White Orifices) is given by:

To understand the rest of the Universe, one only need to add the Fundamental Dilator paradigm.

The Fundamental Dilator is a coherence between two deformation states within the 4D spatial manifold. The orientation of the letters in the figure below maps the orientation of the dilator deformation with respect to our 3D Hypersurface. A vertical lettering means that the dilator overlaps minimally with our 3DUniverse (the Fundamental Dilator is quite flat (along the fourth dimension).

The Fundamental Dilator can be represented by this diagram:

Figure 1. Balls Diagram for the Proton, represented by a phase of the Fundamental Dilator.

Cheers,

MP

Mercury's Perihelion Prequel

Mercury's Perihelion Prequel

I had to figure out what was wrong with Paul Gerber's derivation. Gerber's work has been dismissed by the Wikipedia people and I couldn't figure out from reading their posting if the problem was in the derivation of the Gravitational Potential Formula or afterwards.

Here I derived the Precession Rate formula starting from mine (and Gerber's) Hypergeometrical Gravitational Potential. I was able to obtain the accepted formula.

Paul Gerber's work has been dismissed because he didn't have a great argument to support his potential. That is not the case any longer. My theory is presented here in details and contains all the logical support for the Hypergeometrical Gravitational Equation. I also provided the correct derivation of the Gravitational Lensing using this potential.

Currently, the mindset is such that even when a theory predicts the experimental results, it is still considered at fault because it did not produced non-observable differences based upon General Relativity equations.

Of course, this is a non-scientific reasoning. My theory predicts observed phenomena (e.g. jets comig from Black Holes - White Orifices) that are not predicted by ad-hoc Einstein equations using an ad-hoc Schwarzschild metric.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little research on the subject showed me that the precession was already known by the time of the prediction and was in agreement with many models where the proposers guessed left and right the actual formula for the Gravitational Potential. Some of those models had velocity dependence, although not in the manner I proposed.

In addition, the precession of Mercury was the result of many interactions with the planets of the Solar System. The unexplained precession component was of the order of 43 arc seconds per century.

Let's see if one can solve that problem in a different paradigm, say, in the Hypergeometrical Universe paradigm.

First let's write the equation for the Hypergeometrical Gravitational Force.

(1)

Remember that this equation is not guessed (Ansatz) but derived from first principles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If we consider that the Sun is not rotating, thus V1=0 the final force sensed by Mercury is given by:

(2)

Adiabatic integration upon R yields the potential

(3)

Which is equation (1) on the Gerber Model presented in Jaume Gine paper.

The Kinetic Energy T per unit mass is given by:



Where



Is the angular momentum per unit mass.

The Potential Energy per unit mass is given by:



The generalized momentum per unit mass is given by:



Similarly the generalized force per unit mass is given by:



Solving for P one obtains:



Similarly for F one obtains:











Thus F becomes:



Expanding it in powers of

Neglecting terms above the second order

Equating generalized momentum and forces yield the generalized equation of motion:

Since the Gravitational force is radial, there is no tangential acceleration. Hence, integrating equation (5)

Thus



Yielding the following change of variables (t->θ) and (r=1/u)





thus







This simple equation can be solved promptly if one considers that the terms in parentheses are very close to one for astronomical conditions.

The solution is given by:



Where ε is a constant of integration.

Or



The precession of Mercury's perihelion is given by the change in angle for θ=2π



If one consider that



Considering that the precession of the perihelion or apogee are the same, let's consider the apogee. The precession is given by:



Then the formula for the precession rate is given by:



Gerber and Einstein obtained a more complex version of this formula. Let's see if one can simplify Einstein's equation into ours.

Einstein equation is given by:



ε=Eccentricity, a=Semi-major axis, τ=Orbital period.

Under standard assumptions the orbital period () of a body traveling along an elliptic orbit can be computed as:

where:

• is standard gravitational parameter,
  


• is length of semi-major axis.
  

Replacing the period and the semi-major axis in terms of R₀ yields:



Substituting


Which is the same result!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


This means that given that Gerber's Gravitational potential is also the Hypergeometrical Gravitational Potential and that Gerber's work has been totally dismissed, I cocluded that the cause was inconsistencies in the logic used to derive the Gravitational Potential.

In Gerber's Gravity, the author emphasized that despite Gerber's result yielded the observed precession, it does not provide the same equations as General Relativity – as if this were a necessary problem.

The gravitational radius of the Sun is m = 1.475 km and the semilatus rectum of Mercury's orbit is L = (5.544)107 km, so the precession of Mercury's orbit due to this effect (excluding the perturbations of the other planets, etc.) is 0.1034 arc seconds per revolution. Mercury completes 414.93 revolutions per century, so its orbit precesses (due to this effect) by 42.9 arc seconds per century, in excellent agreement with what is observed. This formula also gives values for all other known bodies orbiting the Sun consistent with observation.

We should mention that although general relativity and Gerber's potential predict the same first-order precession (for weak fields), the respective equations of motion are not identical, even at the first non-Newtonian level of approximation. In terms of the parameter u = 1/r the equations of motion are

so the non-Newtonian terms are actually quite different. Of course, any non-Newtonian terms will lead to orbits that fail to close, so there will be some cumulative precession for the two-body problem. It just so happens that the term +3mu2 in the GR equation of motion and the term 6mu d2u/d2 in Gerber's equation of motion both result in a first-order precession of 6m/L in the slow weak-field limit. Thus Gerber did not in any way anticipate the two-body equation of motion predicted by general relativity, let alone the field equations from which the relativistic equation of motion is derived.

Nevertheless, we have verified that Gerber's potential (1) does indeed yield the observed non-Newtonian precession for planetary orbits, so we return to the question of the how Gerber arrived at this particular form, and whether it has any consistent representation.

Eventually, the author tries to derive Gerber's potential using an argument based upon retarded potentials.

Since we arrived at the same equation obtained by Gerber and Einstein and we know that there has been extensive testing of this equation on the calculation of precession of other planets, spacecrafts, etc. there is no need to pose any more arguments to support the Hypergeometrical Gravitational Equation.

Overzealous Wikipedia editors concluded that because Gerber's argument leading to the Hypergeometrical Gravitational Potential was flawed and thus he did not preceded Einstein in deriving the correct formula for the precession of Mercury's Perihelion. Currently this subtle details is very relevant because the editors believe that General Relativity equations and reality are the same. Somehow, they see other theories as ad-hoc but failed to see how ad-hoc General Relativity and Einstein equations are. Anything that describes the Universe with a parametrized (Unknon) metric cannot be anything other than an Ad-Hoc theory...:)

It also seems that Gerber made a mistake in deriving the Gravitational Lensing angle. Somehow "experts" did not catch his mistake.

I did it correctly and reached the appropriate result.

So Gehrcke initiated a reprint of Gerber's 1902-paper in the Annalen der Physik in 1917, where he questioned the priority of Einstein and tried to prove a possible Plagiarism by him.^{[A 5]}However, according to Albrecht Fölsing^{[B 5]} and Roseveare,^{[B 6]} those claims were rejected, because soon after Gerber's paper was reprinted, scientists like Hugo von Seeliger,^{[A 6]} Max von Laue^{[A 7]} published some papers, where it was shown that Gerber's theory is inconsistent and his formula is not the consequence of his premises. Also Roseveare argued that Gerber's theory is inconsistent and that the value for the deflection of light in the gravitational field of the sun in Gerber's theory was too high by the factor 3/2. And Einstein wrote in 1920:^{[A 8]}

"

Mr. Gehrcke wants to make us believe that the Perihelion shift of mercury can be explained without the theory of relativity. So there are two possibilities. Either you invent special interplanetary masses. [...] Or you rely on a work by Gerber, who already gave the right formula for the Perihelion shift of mercury before me. The experts are not only in agreement that Gerber's derivation is wrong through and through, but the formula cannot be obtained as a consequence of the main assumption made by Gerber. Mr. Gerber's work is therefore completely useless, an unsuccessful and erroneous theoretical attempt. I maintain that the theory of general relativity has provided the first real explanation of the perihelion motion of Mercury. I have not mentioned the work by Gerber originally, because I did not know it when I wrote my work on the perihelion motion of Mercury; even if I had been aware of it, I would not have had any reason to mention it.[C 1]

Thus the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory also "predicts" the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion, the Gravitational Lensing angle, the White Orifice phenomena and thus equates and surpasses General Relativity in its achievement. Needless to say, it provides the reason for having the speed of light as the limit, provides an alternative model for the Gravity induced metric (spacetime) deformation.

Gerber model is a limit of my theory where one considers that body 1 is not rotating. It yields the correct value for the precession constant (42.3 arc seconds per century).

Cheers,

MP

--------------------------------------------

Gerber's Results:


Paul Gerber reached an identical Gravitational Potential and from there derived the precession of Mercury's Perihelion




According to Gerber, the relation of the speed of gravity (c) and the Perihelion shift (Ψ) is:



ε=Eccentricity, a=Semi-major axis, τ=Orbital period.

It was noted by the Einstein- and relativity critic Ernst Gehrcke in 1916,[A 3] that this formula is mathematically identical to Albert Einstein's formula (1915) for general relativity.[A 4]

, where e=Eccentricity, a=Semi-major axis, T=Orbital period.

Data on Mercury


Mercury is the closest planet to the Sun and the eighth largest. Mercury is slightly smaller in diameter than the moons Ganymede and Titan but more than twice as massive.

orbit: 57,910,000 km (0.38 AU) from Sun

diameter: 4,880 km

mass: 3.30e23 kg

Mercury's orbit is highly eccentric; at perihelion it is only 46 million km from the Sun but at aphelion it is 70 million. The position of the perihelion precesses around the Sun at a very slow rate. 19th century astronomers made very careful observations of Mercury's orbital parameters but could not adequately explain them using Newtonian mechanics. The tiny differences between the observed and predicted values were a minor but nagging problem for many decades. It was thought that another planet (sometimes called Vulcan) slightly closer to the Sun than Mercury might account for the discrepancy. But despite much effort, no such planet was found. The real answer turned out to be much more dramatic: Einstein's General Theory of Relativity! Its correct prediction of the motions of Mercury was an important factor in the early acceptance of the theory.

Data on Sun


Our Sun is a normal main-sequence G2 star, one of more than 100 billion stars in our galaxy.

diameter: 1,390,000 km.

mass: 1.989e30kg

temperature: 5800 K (surface)

15,600,000 K (core)

The Sun is by far the largest object in the solar system. It contains more than 99.8% of the total mass of the Solar System (Jupiter contains most of the rest).

Orbital period

Under standard assumptions the orbital period () of a body traveling along an elliptic orbit can be computed as:

where:

• is standard gravitational parameter,
  


• is length of semi-major axis.
  

Conclusions:

• The orbital period is equal to that for a circular orbit with the orbit radius equal to the semi-major axis (),
  


• The orbital period does not depend on the eccentricity (See also: Kepler's third law).
  

Inflation Theory and Energy Conservation

Inflation Theory and Energy Conservation

In Inflation theory, space is supposed to grow or be born as the Universe expands...>)

Since space is isotropic, this growth should happens isotropically, that is, the distance between any two bodies should be increasing with time.

Let's do a Gedanken Experiment in which I go back in time 13 billion years and fashion a glass bottle and blow some air into it. Then I close the bottle and await 13 billion years without aging a second...:)

This Gedanken experiment generates not one but TWO paradoxes. The first one has to do with the existence of solids. The second with the heating out of space growth...:)

The distance between atoms in this bottle should increase and the increase should be proportional to the distance between them.

If one consider that constraint, our bottle would have to become a stretched up glass ball. The work necessary to change the bottle's shape was done by the space itself. Energy from Nothing..

The air inside the glass bottle should also heat up and increase the internal pressure. Again, free energy just from distance...:)

I don't know about you, but to me this sounds like an Unforgiven Energy out of Nothing conclusion...

I held the line on those conclusions. I wrote against Energy From Nothing in Great Balls of Fire...:) and provided an Energy From Something solution to Mankind Energy Problems on Coherence Nuclear Fusion...:)

Never believe when someone offer your something that is too good to be true...:)

Don't be the last to know that Inflation Theory needs replacement and that I have the solution...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- Isaac Hall was kind enough to send me a supportive email   :)

It is always nice to see people taking positions.

The Hubble Expansion Paradigm

The Hubble Expansion Paradigm

There is a lot of noise about the expansion of the Universe. The craziest idea is, of course, the Inflation Theory (Guth) from MIT.

I mentioned many times that that is one of my two pet peeves. The theory has concepts like the creation of space as the Universe expands...:) in addition to suspending all laws of physics during the Big Bang...

The second pet peeve is the much talked about Double Slit Experiment...:) In my theory, dilator surf a 4D dilaton field. The dilaton field travels through the two slits and interferes with itself afterwards. Since the electron will surf the 4D pattern, it will also surf the 3D projection (de Broglie wave interferometer)producing the interferometric deposition. This interferometric deposition is used to support the ondulatory nature of matter. It is clearly an unwarranted conclusion since there is my paradigm which also produces the exactly same results..>:) Only without the Magic

Of course, if expansion is causing the Hubble red-shift in the light coming from distant stars and if that is a property of space then one would expect that as you travel far from home (Earth), the Hubble red-shift would be present in addition to other sources of red-shift (e.g. relativistic time compression).

This is one of the components the scientists from JPL expected to find when they modeled the Pioneer Anomaly microwave signal.

In my theory, the 3D Universe is an expanding hypersphere (light-speed expanding hyperspherical shock-wave Universe) embedded in an already existing 4D spatial manifold (no space creation necessary...;). This naturally yields the Hubble expansion without the need for space creation and without assigning to space the Hubble red-shifting property.

Let me explain better.

It is not because you are at 40 Astronomical Units away (A.U.) that you would expect to sense an extra kick (acceleration due to Hubble expansion.

In fact, I derived the expected apparent deceleration due to the curvature of the 3D space embedded within the 4D spatial manifold.

An hypersphere is obviously the only topology that would yield a constant apparent deceleration.

This is because matter travels within the hypersphere and light travels freely (along the segment linking two points of an arch)...:)

In my derivation of the solution to the Pioneer Anomaly, I did not pay attention to the coherent method for measuring the distance. Call me lazy, but I considered that they knew how to measure distance.

I am interacting with a very kind and generous scientist from JPL. He was kind enough to present me his qualms about a Hubble-like theory like mine in being able to explain the data. He is generous because it take away time just to respond to an email from someone you don't know.

I would love to use his name to lend credibility to my little blog/theory, but since up to now, he is just reading my emails and not the theory, I will await until he evaluates the basic tenets of the theory and find no objections to it or present an objection to it...:)

As I mentioned, I didn't think about the microwave link between Station Control and the Pioneer spacecrafts. It took me by surprise that he would mention Hubble in the context of a coherent measurement.

The microwave link with the Pioneer spacecraft is coherent in the sense that the returning frequency has a ratio relationship with the incoming frequency. Pioneer has a frequency phase-looped oscillator or frequency divider (ratio= 240/221).

This means that the returning frequency is a slave to the incoming frequency. The resonance matching is done by tweaking the Earth oscillator such as to match the Pioneer slaved oscillator (freq. divider). The local (at the Pioneer spacecraft) resonance is calculated using standard Lorentzian relationships. The returning frequency passes through another Lorentzian transformation. The frequencies relationship depends upon both the distance and velocity between Earth and the Pioneer spacecraft through a Lorentz transformation.

To consider that Hubble equation should be used in this situation is a complete misunderstanding of Nature..:) My theory is consistent with the paradigm that the mass surrounding any region of space has an average receding velocity equal to the one given by the Hubble equation (if modified accordingly to my derivation). This is just a reflection of the 4D Big Bang paradigm and equilibrium considerations. Of course, this doesn't apply to master-slave oscillators or objects out of equilibrium (e.g. a spacecraft).

This means that being far away doesn't entitle you to an extra kick due to the expansion. There is no space expansion. There is a shockwave expansion.

In fact, the velocity is shown to be the result of a relaxation process of the local deformation of the Fabric of Space. See the Silver Surfer and ask me questions if you don't understand.

In the Silver Surfer, which is exactly the Pioneer Anomaly problem, I explained that constant velocity is a constant velocity and it is driven by the relaxation of the local Fabric of Space.


In the Pioneer Anomaly, I also explained that despite of the Pioneer spacecraft being traveling at constant speed, its apparent speed would diminishes as a function of time due to the curvature of 3D Space.

In summary, there is no reason for using Hubble expansion considerations to ascertain the added velocity due to the "Universe Expansion" on the motion of our Pioneer spacecraft.

This is a gross misunderstanding of what is happening.  I am sure, Guth would expect some drag as space comes out of those tiny, tiny little space particles..>:) as space gives birth to more space..>:) right before our eyes...

I will continue reaching out and teaching my theory to whomever wants to learn..:)

Please feel free to ask questions or present criticism...:)

Cheers,

MP

HAPPY THANKSGIVING...:)

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!!!!

Click Me!!!!

My friend wrote:

And why did you dressed up that poor man as a chicken??

To be factual this is not a chicken..:)

As much as I am sympathetic with my fellow human, sometimes some silly gimmick has to be used just to emphasize some horrible event taking place under our noses...

Paul Ginsparg visits my site frequently, in fact, he visited it yesterday ..in fact yesteryear...:)

Location Time
United Kingdom Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:27:52 -0600
Ithaca, NY, United States Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:06:59 -0600

and so did Stephen Hawking...:)

Well, well... I can't really be sure that that happened, but just the possibility is something to be thankful for anyway...:)

-------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------

In addition, I am thankful that:

 I was able to provide the solution to the Pioneer Anomaly

Proved that my theory predicts the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion

Proved that my theory predicts Gravitational Lensing

Predicted the existence of White Orifices (Jets emanating from Cylindrical Black Holes)

Provided a single formula for both Gravitation and Electromagnetism (Electrostatics, Magnetostatiscs and GyroGravitation)

Provided a new paradigm for Matter..:)  The Fundamental Dilator the Purveyor of Quantum Mechanics..>:)

Explained how the Fundamental Dilator for Electromagnetism (spin half) and for Gravitation (spin zero) are related

Solved the Pion Decay Paradox on Something about Pions, Path One and Path Two

Explained the Singing Paradox and Universe topology on On the Sphaere One and On the Sphaere Two

Explained Trice Great Hermes Trimegistus' hermetic philosophy on On the Sphaere One and On the Sphaere Two 

Explained the Meaning of Spin 

Explained how to surf the Fabric of Space on my Silver Surfer Series.

Explained Time on The Image on The Mirror where Einstein is showcased with his girfriend..:)

On the Footprints on the Forest, I updated the ancient archetypal vision for the search for enlightenment. Plato's visions are present in my blog since the first one...:)

Responded to Vacuous Criticism in many blogs...:)

Explained positivistic my approach to Blogging as a means to induce a healthy scientific debate

Solved Mankind's Energy Problems on Coherent Nuclear Fusion

Corrected all Newton's equations on Newton's First, Second and Third

Explained the Hyperons in many blogs: The Deltas and their Twisted Minds, Pion Minus, Pion Zero A Majorama Coherence, Omega, The Smoking Xis, Delta Plus Plus

Created the Sam Wormley Challenge to incentivize students, professors to provide a critique to my ideas on record.  I blogged my ideas for a few years, have readers from many universities and somehow haven't ever received a single criticism or question I couldn't rebut or answer. Sam Wormley himself avoided providing a critique...:) after my rebuttal to his initial weak argument...:)

Explained the Pseudo Time-Quantization on the Girlfriend on a Swing blog

Explained the Reality of Space

Explained the Stroboscopic  and Holographic Universe

Explained the Mass of the Neutrino

Explained the Cosmic Microwave Background on Echoes of the BigBang

Solved the Solar Neutrino Puzzle

Explained the Expansion of Space...:) in Is Space Expanding???

Argued against Energy from Nothing and Vacuum States on Plunger Physics

Argued many times against Censorship in The Silence of The Lambs

Challenged Galileo and Newton by pointing their biggest blunders...:)

Talked to Aliens in Area 51

Served Humans

As you can see there is a lot to thankful for...:)

Cheers,

MP

Hypergeometrical Cooper Pairs

Hypergeometrical Cooper Pairs and Superconductivity

I was invited to represent the student body at the celebration of the 50 Years of the Laboratory for the Research of the Structure of Matter at Penn. It was an honor and I was dazzled by the sights of the Fathers of Quantum Mechanics in academic regallia.

I sat on my chair waiting for the beginning of the talks. The gentleman on my side decided to make small talk with that young student- the little me...:) He mentioned his name:Schrieffer... I immediatelly said, " Well, I only know one Schrieffer- from Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) Superconducting Theory... "

I don't really remember what did I say afterwards, but I know that I displayed way too much reverence and poor Bob Schrieffer felt unconfortable and managed to scape...:)

I know for sure that I was hyperventilating...:)

What can I say. I was a naive, wide-eyed student, full of admiration and respect for my fellow scientists and mainly for the visionaries who brought us to our present understanding... I didn't know that I had to play it cool, not to disturb the scientific celebrities...:)

Today, I am going to explain the why there is a formation of a Cooper Pair, that is, why two mutually repulsive electrons would agree to walk togetther in a correlated manner...:)

Not unlike in the case of Alan Guth's Inflation Theory of the Universe, the formation of a Cooper pair requires the absolute turning off of all critical sense in your Brains...:) Equally charge particles are mortal enemies and repeal each other with a force singularly dependent upon their distance..:) That is, the force goes to infinite when they are close..>:) Infinite!!!!!

That bitter pill is gilded by words like "One build a Boson out of two Fermions"...:)

This sounds great but it doesn't mean anything..:)

This would mean something if there were a logical link between spin and charge...:) Current Science has no such logical connection.

My theory provides the logical link between spin and charge.

I hope you will pay the required attention to understand that the reason why you can place a bunch of Hypergeometrical Cooper Pairs close together is because their net interaction is ZERO and it is not because you called it a Boson nor because the pair has zero spin!!!...:)

You know, the Electron was always a Fermion until BCS came up with the concept of Cooper pair. This is a dress-up but it doesn't provide any substancial explanation why a Cooper pair doesn't interact. In this very short blog, I provided such explanation and eliminated the need to dress an Electron as a Boson...:) This doesn't mean anything and doesn't provide any physical insight that will allow for the creation of Room Temperature Superconductors or other more relevant discoveries.

Any dilator has spin otherwise it would had recombined with its antidilator and returned into Nothing...;) The Universe is composed only of dilators which can get together to make things that does not apparently spin. It is just appearances. Things always spins...It just happens that two four-dimensional spins can be seem in three dimensions as a 3D pseudo-rotation..:)

The physics is invisible to your eyes and instruments. It can only be seem with the eyes of the mind... and I have some teardrops to clarify this subject...:)
As I did in Newton First Law, I will provide the Why? You know that Why is the question that will destroy any Cybernetic Supercomputer Hell Bent on World Domination...:)

Why is normally left to Theology and in Science it is always dressed up as a Principle (Equivalence Principle in Quantum Mechanics or Gravitation/Inertia, or Hamilton Principle etc) or sometimes it becomes a Conjecture..:) which is the lowest level of scientific speculation...

What I am detailing here has already been mentioned in my papers and books but I guess it is always worthwhile to draw a picture...:)

Let's draw the two electrons with opposing spins:



You might notice something different between the two electrons. When they spin in different directions they reach different mid-points. In the spin 0.5 electron, the next state is an antiproton on its side, while it is a proton in the spin -0.5 electron (or vice-versa depeding upon definition). Of course, here we have two electron and two anti-electron phases repeling each other but we also have two proton-antiproton phases attracting each other... Thus the net repulsion is ZERO...:) That is much smaller than INFINITE ..:)

In fact, I have to correct the Zero estimate above.  Since I first wrote this blog, I managed to explain the Gravitational Fundamental Dilator - or Hydrogen atom.   I showed that the intermedite phases of the Gravitational Fundamental Dilator are out of phase with the phases visible from our Universe.  The resulting dilator behaves in a Gravitational fashion, that is, their direction of propagation as it travels but it always remains perpendicular to the Fabric of Space, resulting in a 10^36 smaller reaction to the dilaton field.

The Cooper pair is similar, the intermediate phases are out of phase with the in-phase phases.  In the case of a Hydrogen Atom, the interaction is attractive in our Universe but repulsive in the interphases.  The opposite occurs in the Cooper pair. They repel each other in the in-phases but attract each other in the interphases.

The out-of-phase dilation results in the anihilation of intermediate dilaton fields makes dilators susceptible to what we call Gravitation to be hypersuperficial dilaton waves.

Along this line of reasoning, the Cooper pair senses what could be called antigravtitational fields while interacting with other electrons and a Gravitational field while interacting with protons.

Fascinatingly the interaction between electrons of a Cooper Pair is best described as Antigravitation!!!!!!   ....:)

This is the best explanation about the Nature of Superconductivity. 

From Antenae Theory you should also notice that since the Proton and Antiprotons are sideways, their attraction will only be felt in close proximity...:) Near-Field is the correct terminology...

This means that there is a difference between having two electrons with the same spin and two of opposing spins.

As in the Little Prince blog, What is essential is invisible to the Eyes

The difference happens to be observable only in the four dimension and only when we don't have a material existence...:)

This difference is not some obscure and unexplained exchange energy..:) Instead one has an electrostatic interaction between Protons and Antiprotons in a four-dimensional spatial manifold. The subject of binding energy is to be studied by adding a relative kinetic energy (temperature) to the pair. A Cooper Pair with a non-zero temperature will have a net interaction that can be calculated by magnetism, and thus can be calculated in the spacetime side of the Hypergeometrical Universe Icon above. Please read the paper or books to understand how magnetism is modeled in hypergeometrical terms.

That, in a nutshell, is the reason WHY there are Cooper pairs...

It is also the physical reason for the exchange energy in Quantum Mechanics.

Cheers,

MP

PS- Next I will start with how to calculate the Mass (3D Volume overlap) of a Neutron... I will follow with the Hyperons and all isotopes..:)

This is how you will be able to design the stable new elements for your spaceships...:)

Viva Obama...:)

VIVA OBAMA....:)

Every so often quality is so evident that the correct choice is obvious and undeniable.  That is the case with Barack Obama.

The man has the important qualities which should be valued by a nation: intelligence, honesty, preparation, education, common-sense, equilibrium.

As soon as it became evident or likely that he would succeed, the dollar got stronger, the stock market rallied, the people rallied...:) Initial excitement might be tempered with the current reality, but the future looking up again after...:)

There is a renewed hope that if one works hard, provides quality in one's work/person, success will eventually happen.

In my little blog, I confess that my hopes are also renewed.  Someday, some rogue scientist will break ranks with the silenced majority and bring my ideas into the fold of scientific discussions or at least grow some courage and create an argument against it...:) 

Science is the ultimate bastion of silenced majorities. 

If everyone keep reading my ideas and remain afraid of saying something, nobody will ever know that these ideas have quality..:)

Can we ever change the status-quo, the dearth of new ideas and the holding onto ideas that have been proven wrong - at least on some of their peripheral predictions...:) (GR basic predictions are also predicted by my theory and by many others - while only mine predicts the existence of White Orifices...)

Yes, we can!!!

MP

PS- In the next few blogs I will write that my contrite inclusion of gravitomagnetism discussion from Wikipedia proved to be a mistake. 

When one reads an equation (Lense-Thirring effect) that is named after two people, one automatically lends it credibility since it seems that the idea has been vetted by two people who shared the glory. It just happens that gravitomagnetism is experimentally wrong. It is awfully difficult to see that just by looking at the non-physical gravitomagnetism Maxwel equations.  They bring non-physical quantities that are loosely interpreted as magnetism or something else...:)

Canterbury experiment
R.D. Graham, R.B. Hurst, R.J. Thirkettle, C.H. Rowe, P.H. Butler: Experiment to Detect Frame Dragging in a Lead Superconductor, submitted to Physica C.

J. E. Faller, W. J. Hollander, P. G. Nelson, and M. P. McHugh: Gyroscope-weighing experiment with a null result, Physical Review Letters Vol. 64, pp. 825-826, 1990.

J. Luo, Y. X. Nie, Y. Z. Zhang, and Z. B. Zhou: Null result for violation of the equivalence principle with free-fall rotating gyroscopes, PHYSICAL REVIEW D, VOLUME 65, 042005, 2002.

The Canterbury experiment was specially telling. It places a upper limit for gravitomagnetism that is 21 times lower than predictions of Einstein's GR theory.  Remember, these gravitomagnetism equations are weak field limits of Einstein's horrendously difficult to integrate GR equations...:)

I felt bad when I couldn't explain a 0.8% mismatch between my predictions for the vacuum permittivity.and the experimental measurement..>:)  

Eventually I was able to find out the best explanation and gave it to you...:)

This is not the only problem I have with GR.  My problems are not personal...:)  They are the result of myself creating a simple theory with an scalar dilaton field which resulting an scalar Gravitational potential.  Einstein theory requires through the Einstein Equivalence Principle that:

The outcome of any local non-gravitational experiment is independent of the velocity of the free-falling reference frame in which it is performed.

The outcome of any local non-gravitational experiment is independent of the velocity of where and when in the universe is is performed.

Of course, my theory predicts that G depends inversely with the age of the Universe.  It also predicts that an electronic coherence will slow down (red-shifted fluorescence or absorption) just by sitting on the surface of a celestial body.  Of course, there is no distinction between gravitational and electromagnetic fields. In my theory, the difference lies not on the field but on the dilator being subjected to the field....:)

The fact that something is free falling doesn't make a difference since the red-sift depends only upon how twisted the local fabric of space is. That twisting doesn't depend upon the existence of a constraint (surface of the celestial body).

This means that I flatly reject Einstein Equivalence Principle (WEP is alright if one considers only 3DMasses) and GR Einstein equations based upon its failure on predicting White Orifices and incorrect predictions on gravitomagnetism.  My theory predicts the other experimentally events (Gravitational Lensing and the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion) and predicts White Orifices..>:)

Letters from Vic

Letters from a friend.

I am quite happy to have received this email from my dear friend Victor.

Victor runs the sciprint.org, a preprint repository which lacks the nice black-listing amenities that Los Alamos Arxives takes so much pride.

Please, feel free to contact Vic to ask questions about the repository either by email: admin@sciprint.org or through the repository site URL: www.sciprint.org.

Please, visit the www.sciprint.org and delve deep into the astrophysics section. It is one of the few places where people with new ideas are allowed to post them.

This means that scientists are allowed to present preprints and receive feedback, positive or negative.

I am quite happy to say that the tone of discussion is quite polite and I have this letter to prove that feedback can be enlightening.

Below I present the very useful information I received from Vic when I asked the silly question about the existence of other non-GR theories that were consistent with the GR tests:

• Precession of Mercury Perihelion
  
• Gravitational Lensing
  

He sent me links to many papers with many theories. I will not cover them or rebut them here - some of them do not satisfy energy and/or momentum conservation, others have been discredited (Whitehead) by others...:)

Eventually, I will read everything and find out what seems to be the problem.

There was a review paper which was especially interesting since it described certain things which I deemed incorrect.  One of them are:

• An scalar theory - a theory when the Gravitational potential is an scalar- if it succeeds in satisfying the Precession test it will fail on the Gravitational Red Shift test.

It just happens that my theory provides an scalar gravitational field and it is consistent with the Precession and Gravitational Lensing tests.  

In the derivations for those Gravitational Lensing test, I mentioned that light cannot be accelerated nor decelerated by gravity (dilaton field), only scattered within the 3D Shockwave Universe.

The failure in reasoning by the author is due to the consideration that light is emitted with the appropriate frequency and that frequency is later changed as the photon travels outwards through the gravitational field.

Under those conditions only shifting the speed of light would result in a change of wavelength (red shifting).  In the derivation of Gravitational Lensing, I mentioned that Light cannot be accelerated or decelerated only scattered, thus light speed is always constant...:)

My theory proved that on a twisted Fabric of Space, all motions (dynamics, chemistry, fluorescence, coherences) are slowed down yielding lower frequencies.  The gravitational field (dilaton field) provides this underlying twist on which the electronic coherences associated with light emission takes place.  

This means that the red shifting is not due to effects as the photons traveled outwards from the gravitational center but they are created RED...:) and are more red-shifted the closer their originators are from the gravitational source. 

This means that one wouldn't use potential energy postulate to excise energy from the photon, as if the photon were to get tired as it escapes from the gravitational pull...:)  In my theory, the photon is red-shifted because Gravitational field (dilaton field) locally deforms the Fabric of Space.

I will address that paper later.

Victor also wrote:

Thank you MP, you're welcome. Btw, IMO it would be necessary to somehow presents your idea in the 'language' that astrophysics can understand, i.e. I offer you some references/citation to flat metric. 

For instance, if --let say- I can predict Mercury precession from purely quantum jumps, but without a 'metric', then chance is the idea will be ignored by astrophysics.  

If you use /introduce a kind of metric, then others can begin to 'test' your idea with standard proposition. (just read the fate of Hal Puthoff with his PV-theory as alternative to GTR, most physicists ignore his idea, only because it is different from GTR)

But of course, it is up to you.

These last few comments are enligthning not about science but about inertia..:)  and I am not speaking of Mach's Principle...:)

Inertia in the sense that people (astrophysicists) are so happy calculating their Ricci tensors, guessing their metrics or Lagrangians that they would make a tremendous effort to avoid anything that is not written in those terms.

My theory is different from others because I place the Universe in motion at the speed of light..:)  That is might scary...:) Then through the introduction of the Fundamental Dilator paradigm, I eliminated the difference between Gravitation and Electromagnetism with the side effect of quantizing the ligthspeed hyperspherical expansion.  The de Broglie step is the Compton wavelenght of a Hydrogen Atom...>:)

The fundamental dilator creates an stroboscopic universe.

These are the fundamental aspects of my theory!!!

When I think about how to express this using a terminology that astrophysicist might be happy with, I face the reality that my metric is trivial.  Little is in the metric.  There is no Action...:) In fact, the standard Action only means that all particles (bodies) are flying with the shockwave Universe...:)

I added another Lagrangian Principle...:)  There is no action - I've just stated that dilators do not want to dilate out-of-phase with the others...:)  They are an agreeable bunch..:) thus creating a Cosmological Coherence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is not mathematics.  It is just pure physics.

I would have a hard time making it unintelligible such that astrophysicists can read it...:)

In addition, the more complex it is the more difficult it is to improve upon or to see the forest for the trees...

Maybe some brilliant astrophysicist out there can send me a letter and help me find the correct lingo...:)

Below is the letter and the links.

Cheers,

MP

____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

Dear MP

Thanks for reply, yeah there is chance to explain Mercury precession within flat metric, but not very sure which is 'better' post-diction (not prediction) of the phenomenon.

You may try with googling, perhaps begin with Whitehead's theory . There is also recent article by Nishikawa on unification which includes such Mercury prediction for flat metric:

NISHIKAWA: arXiv:hep-th/0407057
unification without assuming a phase transition nor a Higgs particle. ........ i.e., the angle of perihelion precession during a period is −2πγ ...
arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0407057.pdf

[PDF] arXiv:gr-qc/0611006 v1 1 Nov 2006
assumes the presence of a flat background metric η ..... on the perihelion advance of Mercury, and so Whitehead’s theory agrees with the data...
arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0611006

secular motion of the perihelion of Mercury, are relevant. ... Given Whitehead’s interest in separating the metric of GTR from the physics of GTR, ...
www.phil-inst.hu/~szekely/PIRT_Budapest/ft/Desmet_ft.pdf

Alternatives to General Relativity (GR)
In Whitehead (1922), the physical metric g is constructed algebraically from the ..... conflict with the perihelion precession of Mercury and gravitational ...
freepages.misc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hallsofjamaica/Gravity_not_GR.pdf

Do any theories of gravity exist other than general relativity that are capable of explaining the perihelion of mercury's orbit? In particular, I would like ...
www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-194045.html

Whitehead’s Theory of Gravity
two metric, global flat background interpretation. .... post-Newtonian effects ( such as the additional perihelion shift of Mercury), viable theories ...
ls.poly.edu/~jbain/papers/Whitehead.pdf


Up to know, my own belief is that this issue is closed, i.e. it is not only GTR that can explain the precession, although this problem is some kind of 'prerequisite' for anyone who is willing to compete with the standard GTR, such as yours ;-)

IMO, it would be a good idea if you write a paper discussing such a comparison between your own approach and other flat-metric theories toward Mercury precision. I mean with comparison, is head-to-head compare table down to minute until Pluto precession, and then let the readers see which one is the champion.

For a journal who may be willing to consider your work, you may begin with Apeiron (redshift.vif.com), or Progress in Physics (ptep-online.com). Not sure with other journals, but chance is you will get dismissed if trying to send to standard journals like Phys. Rev. Letter...no hope with them.

Best wishes

Victor C

ps: Sometime ago Mr Kerr also explains this precession with his own method. you can dig for his article in sciprint.orgm if you wish. I forward this letter to him.

V/C Origin

The Origin of v/c ratio

In the Hypergeometrical Universe model, the expansion of the 3D Universe Hypersphere happens at the speed of light (c).

Motion within our 3D Universe is seem to be transversal to the radial direction of propagation. This means that v/c is the tangent of the angle of propagation.

This is the reason v/c exists in Relativity and in my theory. In fact, in Relavity the beta factor is just part of Lorentz transformation which later was reinterpreted by Einstein as a metric of the physical space..:)

In explaining the Precession of Mercury Perihelion I was able to refer to the work of Gerber who in 1898 used the same potential my theory derives. In fact, I didn't find the original work from Gerber in the internet but a work by Jaume Gine.

The equation for the Hypergeometrical Gravitational potential.

Gine tried to rederive Gerber's work starting from a retarded potential paradigm. The problem with that is that is generates higher order derivatives. He failed to understand the geometric origin of that term which can only be understood in a 4D spatial manifold paradigm.  All velocity ratios in my theory are due to angles either with respect to the fourth spatial dimension R or within the 3D hypersphere (as in the Biot-Savart law derivation).

In the case of moving dilators ratio between velocities are still angles and do not require higher order derivatives for their definition.

Please feel free to read the derivation of Gyrogravitation and Magnetism (Biot-Savart Law) . I've just take a different angle on the subject..:)

Cheers,

MP

Gyrogravity and Antigravity

Gyrogravity and Antigravity

In my Gyrogravity and Antigravity I presented the Hypergeometrical Universe Law of Gravitation. It is shown below:



This simple formula was obtained from first principles, together with the formula for G, the Gravitational Constant...:)

This is a clean and elegant derivation shown in this pdf.

I failed to discover prior developments in this area and in doing so, I failed to acknowledge great efforts by many (I am sure I will failed infinitely in bringing about everyone that thought about Gravitation of moving bodies...:).

Nevertheless, that was an honest overlook. Given enough time, I was able to find Gravitomagnetism entry in Wikipedia...:) which I reproduced below:

-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Background

This approximate reformulation of gravitation as described by general relativity makes a "fictitious force" appear in a frame of reference different from a moving, gravitating body. By analogy with electromagnetism, this fictitious force is called the gravitomagnetic force, since it arises in the same way that a moving electric charge creates a magnetic field, the analogous "fictitious force" in special relativity. The main consequence of the gravitomagnetic force, or acceleration, is that a free-falling object near a massive rotating object will itself rotate. This prediction, often loosely referred to as a gravitomagnetic effect, is among the last basic predictions of general relativity yet to be directly tested.

Indirect validations of gravitomagnetic effects have been derived from analyses of relativistic jets. Sir Roger Penrose had proposed a frame dragging mechanism for extracting energy and momentum from rotating black holes.^[1] Reva Kay Williams, University of Florida, developed a rigorous proof that validated Penrose's mechanism.^[2] Her model showed the Lense-Thirring effect could account for the observed high energies and luminosities of quasars and active galactic nuclei; the collimated jets about their polar axis; and the asymmetrical jets (relative to the orbital plane).^[3] All of those observed properties could be explained in terms of gravitomagnetic effects.^[4] Williams’ application of Penrose’s mechanism can be applied to black holes of any size.^[5] Subsequently, relativistic jets can serve as the largest and brightest form of validations for gravitomagnetism.

A group at Stanford University is currently analyzing data from the first direct test of GEM, the Gravity Probe B satellite experiment.

[edit]Equations

According to general relativity, the gravitational field produced by a rotating object (or any rotating mass-energy) can, in a particular limiting case, be described by equations that have the same form as the magnetic field in classical electromagnetism. Starting from the basic equation of general relativity, the Einstein field equation, and assuming a weak gravitational field or reasonably flat spacetime, Lano, ^[6] Fedosin ^[7] Agop, Buzea and Ciobanu, ^[8] Mashhoon, Gronwald, and Lichtenegger,^[9] and Clark and Tucker,^[10] have derived the following gravitational analogs to Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism, called the "GEM equations":

where:

• E_g is the static gravitational field (conventional gravity, also called gravitoelectric for the sake of analogy);
• B_g is the gravitomagnetic field;
• ρ is mass density (instead of electric charge density);
• v_ρ is the velocity of the mass flow generating the gravitomagnetic field;
• J is mass current density (J = ρ v_ρ);
• G is the gravitational constant;